Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Asunto: »»Youth reform: Changes in youth academies / junior traini
If you start with lower and higher skills it will ending with lower and higher skills
If that's your only argument for disqualifying rules "written by a noob" it's very thin.
Oh really? Since when does high skills start at at least solid and low skills stay at unsatisfactory, if your player progresses 10 youth skill levels?
If it really was proportionally, then my low skills should indeed be lower than the high skills, but not with a difference of 9 skillpojnts, when 10 skillpoints is the max amount a skill can reach within the youth. Clearly, you're as noob thinking as the writer of the rules in this matter.
If that's your only argument for disqualifying rules "written by a noob" it's very thin.
Oh really? Since when does high skills start at at least solid and low skills stay at unsatisfactory, if your player progresses 10 youth skill levels?
If it really was proportionally, then my low skills should indeed be lower than the high skills, but not with a difference of 9 skillpojnts, when 10 skillpoints is the max amount a skill can reach within the youth. Clearly, you're as noob thinking as the writer of the rules in this matter.
Could be, but most of them -even with higher pace - are worthless, so why only fired lower pace ? :-)
Imo, its just psychological, we tend to retain lower pace juniors (because it's a pain) and forgive those with higher paces , but worthless too.
Imo, its just psychological, we tend to retain lower pace juniors (because it's a pain) and forgive those with higher paces , but worthless too.
Proportionally doesn't mean the same addition of progression, it could be a factor base on starting skills or anything else not only a simple addition each weeks.
You can call noob all the people you want, but the reality is you didnt know and no ones know the true model of progression and relationship between skills and junior general levels. Since skills are invisible, the general level is never certain (coach's errors) and skill progression stops at 10, it's quite impossible to verify a theory or model. By default, I prefer rules written by a noob to user claims based on nothing.
(editado)
You can call noob all the people you want, but the reality is you didnt know and no ones know the true model of progression and relationship between skills and junior general levels. Since skills are invisible, the general level is never certain (coach's errors) and skill progression stops at 10, it's quite impossible to verify a theory or model. By default, I prefer rules written by a noob to user claims based on nothing.
(editado)
Very old rules (like the one about youth school) were written by original game developers, so yeah, I wouldn't call them noobs since they actually coded those things
And they did such a nice job with our current ME! And the design... And the random in this game! Not to forget...our form!
Why the hell do you play this game if you apparently don't like it so much? You noticed all those things after 19 years of playing?
Because there's no alternative in this kind of games. It still is the best around, but it has a massive amount of flaws other games don't have.
You should've known that, right?
You should've known that, right?
So the best game around (according to you) was created by noobs, cool
we tend to retain lower pace juniors (because it's a pain) and forgive those with higher paces , but worthless too.
It makes sense.
Does anyone have an idea where the youth reform will be focused? or any thread link about it?
It makes sense.
Does anyone have an idea where the youth reform will be focused? or any thread link about it?
It's a truth...I cannot do anything else than agree with that :-p
Judging from my own xp (and Sktables.org dB) it's impossible to get a true picture of talent distribution since its nearly impossible to confirm a talent using stat tools (only 100% of correlation coefficient can confirm, its usually never happen due to lack of weeks data). But imo, It's just a random dice between 3 to 6 and the median point should be 4.5. only because Sokker is globally "basic" in computing.
1. Data you have is biased towards better talents because most users don't hold juniors with terrible talents in their youth schools. Even then, there are plenty of bad talents in your database ;)
2. I have multiple examples of extremely bad talents from my youth school. 1, 2, 3 - these are good examples that clearly show talents worse than 6 can happen. I don't say they are exactly what Sokker Asistente says, just that they are really bad.
3. Here is a screenshot of my 126 juniors with calculated talent in Sokker Asistente. Median talent 5.82. When almost half of my juniors show talent >6 I can't see how one could think that 6 is the max. It's statistically impossible. Sure, some talents are overestimated and some are underestimated, but on average (as it's big enough dataset) it should cancel out and real median shouldn't be far off (probably a bit lower).
I'm sure others could show similar data from Sokker Asistente.
4. Here is an ancient topic that shows there were extremely bad talents when the exact youth level was known in youth school. Terrible talents (like 20+) were possible back then and as far as I know it was not changed.
So the difference you see between YS talent and senior talent may simply be due to the erratic evaluation in YS, whereas in senior you accumulate much more progression data.
No it's not. I don't draw conclusions from individual cases. It's clear that talents in seniors (calculated in Sokker Asistente style) are better than real talents in youth school, especially in cases of average and bad talents (where the difference when measuring both talents is bigger). I know my data, I don't look blindly at talent number from linear regression.
Another difference is that training is clearly not the same in YS: all skills progress proportionally to the speed of the talent, which is not the case in senior, where several types of training have different effects.
The point of my comment was to show the difference between talents measured by users in youth school and then in senior team. Of course training in youth school is different, but it doesn't matter at all for the point of my comment.
Example, let's say we have 2 players, and let's say we magically know their exact talents in youth school:
Player A with talent 3.2 in youth school
Player B with talent 6.4 in youth school
In each week of training in youth school player B will get 50% of progress of player A. He needs 2 weeks of training in youth school to get the same progress player B gets in 1 week. It doesn't matter here what that progress exactly is in terms of skills.
But in senior team when comparing training gains between these two players the difference will get smaller, it will be something like 3 weeks of training for player B = 2 weeks of training for player A, and tool like Sokker Asistente (or my tool that takes me way too long to finish :p) will show (with enough training data) talent closer to (rough estimation) ~4.6 for player B, while player A talent will stay at the very top ~3.1-3.2. That's the point.
1. Data you have is biased towards better talents because most users don't hold juniors with terrible talents in their youth schools. Even then, there are plenty of bad talents in your database ;)
2. I have multiple examples of extremely bad talents from my youth school. 1, 2, 3 - these are good examples that clearly show talents worse than 6 can happen. I don't say they are exactly what Sokker Asistente says, just that they are really bad.
3. Here is a screenshot of my 126 juniors with calculated talent in Sokker Asistente. Median talent 5.82. When almost half of my juniors show talent >6 I can't see how one could think that 6 is the max. It's statistically impossible. Sure, some talents are overestimated and some are underestimated, but on average (as it's big enough dataset) it should cancel out and real median shouldn't be far off (probably a bit lower).
I'm sure others could show similar data from Sokker Asistente.
4. Here is an ancient topic that shows there were extremely bad talents when the exact youth level was known in youth school. Terrible talents (like 20+) were possible back then and as far as I know it was not changed.
So the difference you see between YS talent and senior talent may simply be due to the erratic evaluation in YS, whereas in senior you accumulate much more progression data.
No it's not. I don't draw conclusions from individual cases. It's clear that talents in seniors (calculated in Sokker Asistente style) are better than real talents in youth school, especially in cases of average and bad talents (where the difference when measuring both talents is bigger). I know my data, I don't look blindly at talent number from linear regression.
Another difference is that training is clearly not the same in YS: all skills progress proportionally to the speed of the talent, which is not the case in senior, where several types of training have different effects.
The point of my comment was to show the difference between talents measured by users in youth school and then in senior team. Of course training in youth school is different, but it doesn't matter at all for the point of my comment.
Example, let's say we have 2 players, and let's say we magically know their exact talents in youth school:
Player A with talent 3.2 in youth school
Player B with talent 6.4 in youth school
In each week of training in youth school player B will get 50% of progress of player A. He needs 2 weeks of training in youth school to get the same progress player B gets in 1 week. It doesn't matter here what that progress exactly is in terms of skills.
But in senior team when comparing training gains between these two players the difference will get smaller, it will be something like 3 weeks of training for player B = 2 weeks of training for player A, and tool like Sokker Asistente (or my tool that takes me way too long to finish :p) will show (with enough training data) talent closer to (rough estimation) ~4.6 for player B, while player A talent will stay at the very top ~3.1-3.2. That's the point.
As for talent between 3 and 6, with 4.5 median
Talents from my current YS [not counting 0-4 weeks youths]
4.75
3.74
6.57
5.60
3.85
4.36
5.91
12.00
6.50
But as Mikoos said, these are "the best" I had in xx weeks, worse ones were deleted already
As a side note, yes, I'm extremely lucky with my youth school lately... I have 12 spots taken only because in nearest 2 weeks 4 of my youths go out (to the trash probably) and I need MIN 11 to stay in Youth League. If it wasn't for that I'd have 3/30 spots taken in my youth school, bloody hell...
Talents from my current YS [not counting 0-4 weeks youths]
4.75
3.74
6.57
5.60
3.85
4.36
5.91
12.00
6.50
But as Mikoos said, these are "the best" I had in xx weeks, worse ones were deleted already
As a side note, yes, I'm extremely lucky with my youth school lately... I have 12 spots taken only because in nearest 2 weeks 4 of my youths go out (to the trash probably) and I need MIN 11 to stay in Youth League. If it wasn't for that I'd have 3/30 spots taken in my youth school, bloody hell...