Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Halby

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Halby

  • Rank
    Amateur

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm told to use 5 clicks per player to compliment the recent conduct of all 20 players once a month... i'm told to sort by player rating in the most recent match, and compliment the form of the top players, while insulting the form of teh bottom players... Both of these tasks waste tons of time, have no nuance whatsoever to them, and could easily be automated... in fact they are so easily automated i'd argue you could just leave them out entirely and let people assume i'm complimenting people on their form and conduct, without the game having to tell me about it. This reminds me of the 'sunk cost fallacy' vid i just watched, where ppl design a feature, then in testing realize that feature is dumb, but don't want to remove it, because it cost x hours to make it in the first place.
  2. as ayr united with my 0.5 star world reputation, if i hold a friendly with another noob team, i pay a fee of 0, and get a payout of 3000... but match day expenses are 5000 and the gate pays almost 0, cuz noone wants to see us play... so i actually lose money. if i play a friendly against a dude who's trastically better than me, i pay a much higher fee, but the diff btw fee and payout is still 3000, gate pays more cuz ppl actually care, but match day expenses still eat the whole pile, so i still lose money... are friendlies completely pointless, seeing as how i can get match sharpness from my u20 games and friendlies lose money? or am I mis-reading the data? I know I've read that friendlies are a way to make money.
  3. Thanks, so he is a natural at D(R) to begin with, so I thought I could train him in a role (full back) but I was wrong. by setting him to train full back, i was really just telling him to try and improve the attributes associated with being a full back... and if those attributes had improved, his suitability to that roll would also have gone up... but suitability for roll and duty, is not like familiarity with position. Makes sense now.
  4. IE: if I tell a scout "go find me someone with at least 15 finishing and 15 off the ball" he's presumably going to go watch some team practices and matches and trials and such, looking for someone who looks like a good candidate, then he's going to watch each specific candidate until he determines "nope, his finishing is btw 8 and 12, no good" then move to next candidate... My question is, once he's gained like 5% knowledge on this player, enough to eliminate him from the search, does my team retain that knowledge, so that in the future if i say "find me someone with 8 finishing" he'll go to this guy because he already knows he's above 8?
  5. Also, if i leave a dude's individual position training as 'striker' (generic default) and set his individual training to finishing, will he gain more finishing points, than if i set his roll training to 'poacher' and indiv to finishing? ie: does selecting the specific roll you want him to train cause him to focus on all the abilities central to that roll, at the expense of possibly gaining MORE in the 1 specific ability you want him to truly focus on?
  6. Also, yes, he has reached his potential according to my assistant coach and head scout... so I guess players who have not yet reached their potential can gain more skill points per year than players who already reached their potential... but that begs the question, how many more... if I have a guy with 13 in all the stats i care about for his position, but 3 in one of those stats... is it reasonable to assume he can gain +4 points per year in that stat until it's eventually reasonable, or should i just throw him in the trash cuz he'll never catch up?
  7. ah, o.k. so if a player is a 'natural' at defensive back, but only 'competent' at full back, he won't ever get to natural at full back unless his stats change? I thought natural vs competent stuff was how familiar he was with playing the roll, ie: how long you've had the coaches trying to teach him to play the roll + how often he's played it.
  8. on ayr united scottland championship league team, 22 yr old nicky devlin (workrate 12, determination 14) is a super quick good defensive fullback on the right side... he sucks at passing and crossing, so he'll never be a good 'full back' but, i decided experimentally to set him to train in that roll for a full season... he was a starter in nearly every game. at the beginning he had a suitability for that roll of 7 (competent) at the end, he still had a suitability of 7 (competent) ... I don't get it? it SEEMS like because he isn't really suited to that roll because of his attributes, that he'll never climb above 7 unless his stats change, but in many youtube videos and text guides, I see people recommending cross-training players from one roll to another... Also in the entire season his combined stat raise was like 1 ... i expected more from a 22 yr old with a good work rate and determination who got tons of play time and had individual training set up... I get that ayr has not the greatest coaches and not the greatest facilities, but wow, if players suitability to a roll is an average of the 5-10 stats that roll requires divided by the difficulty of the league they are in, and even the hardest working young dude only moves up by 1-2 attribute points per year... i should just never bother with youngsters at all, only hire people who are already 3+ stars, and expect them to stay the same forever? I was sorta led to believe thru guides that i should be playing my 2 star 22 year old because with more play time he'll eventually be a 5 star 28 year old... but a 5 star guy in my league avgs 13 in all stats, while a 2 star guy avgs 7 in all stats so if the roll a dude is playing has 10 relevant stats, he needs to move up about 60 points to go from 2 star to 5 star... to do it in 6 years he'd need 10 points a year, and i'm seeing 1 point per year... so it's just not realistic at all... Perhaps all the guides are written by people playing premier league rich teams with the best coaching and the best facilities? But that begs the question, why do lower league teams even have 'under 20' and 'under 18' squads? if the idea is to buy em cheap, train em from 0.5 stars up to 3 stars, then sell them at a profit... but the move from 0.5 to 3 is 30 attribute points, and they only gain 1 per year... it's just not realistic. I must be missing something, please tell me how i'm wrong.
×
×
  • Create New...