Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: Youth reform - poll
If it requires more investment, it's a bad idea.
If it leads to more good youths, it's a bad idea.
The fix is not to lose 19+ but to make 16-18 less valuable so the skill gap closes. By lowering the ceiling, you end up with more players worth having across the range.
It would also eventually bring club ratings closer together because the 80+ players would be much rarer.
If you want to end pointless youths, just show the damn skills.
If it leads to more good youths, it's a bad idea.
The fix is not to lose 19+ but to make 16-18 less valuable so the skill gap closes. By lowering the ceiling, you end up with more players worth having across the range.
It would also eventually bring club ratings closer together because the 80+ players would be much rarer.
If you want to end pointless youths, just show the damn skills.
IMHO to wait 5 seasons until your valued youngs are ready to fight is not an option at all. Nobody like to lose all the games 27-3 until his youngs are finally usable. IMHO the talent and the junior team story are a quite complicated way to try to hide LUCK.
With no result obviously. Someone is lucky and the others are not. It is inevitable.The game engine must instead offer fun and the chanche to win every single game from the very first minute. That's how it works in Las Vegas and they are quite happy with it.
Pheraps a simpler system based on the sum of all skills could be an easier alternative. For example lower level leagues needs 15 players in the range 40-50 , 50-60, 60-70, top leagues 70-80, 80-90 and very few up to 100 for top leagues and world competitions.
You search for some POR-DEF-MID-ATT in the range of your league and you keep what you get. 2 minutes done. Really every single minute i spend on the transfer list is a lost of time and a pain in....
The point is that a balanced legaue generate much more fun than leagues where two teams can pay 2mio for a player and all the other struggle with pennies until the youth team produce something usable.
On the long run this system will kill this game for sure.
The financial system of Sokker must be fun oriented. If you get a promotion you should get money to buy players for the new league. If you lose and you can't pay them any more ... well keep what you can and the others are fired. Amen. But at least all will have fun in the lower league too.
I think Sokker is not a kind of Monopoly game. Is much more a kind of a Chess game. The fun part for me are tactics, study your opponents movements to find weak points exactly as it happens in real football. Most of the time real trainers must come up with what they get. The market schould be open only two weeks per season as it happens in real football.
With no result obviously. Someone is lucky and the others are not. It is inevitable.The game engine must instead offer fun and the chanche to win every single game from the very first minute. That's how it works in Las Vegas and they are quite happy with it.
Pheraps a simpler system based on the sum of all skills could be an easier alternative. For example lower level leagues needs 15 players in the range 40-50 , 50-60, 60-70, top leagues 70-80, 80-90 and very few up to 100 for top leagues and world competitions.
You search for some POR-DEF-MID-ATT in the range of your league and you keep what you get. 2 minutes done. Really every single minute i spend on the transfer list is a lost of time and a pain in....
The point is that a balanced legaue generate much more fun than leagues where two teams can pay 2mio for a player and all the other struggle with pennies until the youth team produce something usable.
On the long run this system will kill this game for sure.
The financial system of Sokker must be fun oriented. If you get a promotion you should get money to buy players for the new league. If you lose and you can't pay them any more ... well keep what you can and the others are fired. Amen. But at least all will have fun in the lower league too.
I think Sokker is not a kind of Monopoly game. Is much more a kind of a Chess game. The fun part for me are tactics, study your opponents movements to find weak points exactly as it happens in real football. Most of the time real trainers must come up with what they get. The market schould be open only two weeks per season as it happens in real football.
I did suggest a while back that if you want to fix Training VS Competition, you have to move training to the U-21s and operate it as a separate entity.
Training is still important but in a balanced league you will probably search for short term imnprovements to fill gaps for your weaker players . On the other hand if you loose your league you can not afford stronger player any more and even from the point of view of the player this is good. He will for sure find someone on his level.
Maybe simplifying the whole system would be better.
U-21's (for players 21 and under, duh)
Main Team (For anyone, but once a player is promoted, can't be sent back)
U-21 Squad only get general training but you can see skills
Main team get specific training but at a slower rate
Players can only be trained until 21. Once they hit 22, their skills are frozen until 29.
It would require a rework on training rates.
U-21's (for players 21 and under, duh)
Main Team (For anyone, but once a player is promoted, can't be sent back)
U-21 Squad only get general training but you can see skills
Main team get specific training but at a slower rate
Players can only be trained until 21. Once they hit 22, their skills are frozen until 29.
It would require a rework on training rates.
Well i don't need a long term relation with my players, and for sure i prefer chess figures that are able to play in the league where i play at the present moment. Their technical evolution is quite a boring story in my view.
I see training as s tactical fine-tuning more than than a long term evolution plan
I see training as s tactical fine-tuning more than than a long term evolution plan
U-21 Squad only get general training but you can see skills
Main team get specific training but at a slower rate
I would turn that around...
U21 getting fast and specific training, as they do now...
A-team players getting ALL formation training on all skills, but they need minutes played to boost the training % to 100
So that means that you ''form'' a players base at the U21 by selective training, so they are more ready for the A-team on their specific position.
Also, a player should not lose skills if they're not physical skills, like pace or stamina. Technique, passing, GK, PM, defender and striker and all technical or mental skills and they are imo not able to go down for as long as the player is playing. But with this system, they automatically stop developping after their 22nd birthday and start rising all skills for about 3 to 4 levels over the next 8 years. Then skill maintenance is necessary by playing, making minutes. Only injuries could bring some skills down, but only physical or technical skills.
Imo, PM is the only skill that cannot rise with training, but only with experience from matches. So imo it's also the only skill that must be able to rise further after the age of 30. After excellent, f.e. 100 full matches are needed to level in PM, so in order to reach divine PM, the man needs to play 800 full matches. This makes NT matches slightly more important, but not overpowered.
Yet, these are huge changes to the game... It must be worked out very good before an implemention is even food for discussion.
(edited)
Main team get specific training but at a slower rate
I would turn that around...
U21 getting fast and specific training, as they do now...
A-team players getting ALL formation training on all skills, but they need minutes played to boost the training % to 100
So that means that you ''form'' a players base at the U21 by selective training, so they are more ready for the A-team on their specific position.
Also, a player should not lose skills if they're not physical skills, like pace or stamina. Technique, passing, GK, PM, defender and striker and all technical or mental skills and they are imo not able to go down for as long as the player is playing. But with this system, they automatically stop developping after their 22nd birthday and start rising all skills for about 3 to 4 levels over the next 8 years. Then skill maintenance is necessary by playing, making minutes. Only injuries could bring some skills down, but only physical or technical skills.
Imo, PM is the only skill that cannot rise with training, but only with experience from matches. So imo it's also the only skill that must be able to rise further after the age of 30. After excellent, f.e. 100 full matches are needed to level in PM, so in order to reach divine PM, the man needs to play 800 full matches. This makes NT matches slightly more important, but not overpowered.
Yet, these are huge changes to the game... It must be worked out very good before an implemention is even food for discussion.
(edited)
I vote for a value of 1, I think we don't need abrupt changes and I go more for the idea of small improvements.
While it is true that the game had not been updated for a long time, this should not condition the intention to improve it. I can simply take as an example the disaster caused by increasing the number of games per week and the number of injuries.
While it is true that the game had not been updated for a long time, this should not condition the intention to improve it. I can simply take as an example the disaster caused by increasing the number of games per week and the number of injuries.
Did you read Raul 2d post ?
https://sokker.org/forum_topic/ID_forum/63355/ID_topic/3621569/pg/2
https://sokker.org/forum_topic/ID_forum/63355/ID_topic/3621569/pg/2
Oh sorry! I don't...
I understand that I agree with the idea that this is not a big change, I like this, I also understand the firm objective of reducing the number of good players, in this I believe that my position is neutral, I give the benefit of the doubt.
I apologize if I am mentioning other changed aspects of the game, these are changes that have disappointed me and I keep them in mind.
Regards
I understand that I agree with the idea that this is not a big change, I like this, I also understand the firm objective of reducing the number of good players, in this I believe that my position is neutral, I give the benefit of the doubt.
I apologize if I am mentioning other changed aspects of the game, these are changes that have disappointed me and I keep them in mind.
Regards
I don't think the youth system is a problem right now. Like Raul also said, it produces everything sokker needs atm and could produce even more in phases when Sokker would get an influx of new players that need players at relatively affordable prices.
I like especially:
- atm all clubs have the same chance of getting talented and young juniors, there is no way for big clubs to get better ones when they join the youth club. They will however be better when pulled of course, but this requires a lot of investment.
- the youth team often is a money sink that is required; I don't think many teams make a real profit out of it but it is required to find talented juniors as there is no real way to guarantee talent of bought players as there is no way of making it visible as a number.
I also don't see the problem in 20 y old pulled juniors being worse than 16 year olds that have been on one of our few trainingspaces for many seasons. Some juniors will always be better than others, that's intended to give us emotions, isn't it? We already have a "balancing" taking effect for high-level juniors and yes, skill distribution can be a pain, but in the end most skills are useful in most positions.
If there are too many good players when they are old, then just do what you already did and implement higher levels that can be reached through training or lower the training-speed for high level skills.
Now there is one change I would agree on:
- Main skill: atm we cannot influence "the position" someone will be playing in. I would agree on a system, that allows managers to chose a skill a specific junior will be better than other skills from passing, striking, playmaking and defending (GKs are always with high GK already, pace and technique are too universal thus cannot be chosen). For example if a team does train striking, he could pick a junior to focus on striking in the youth school and then when pulled this would guarantee to make striking one of the highest skills he has. This change would a) not make new juniors better than in the old system as you could still get multiple main skills but b) it would help a little bit in getting a junior the club can actually use themselves instead of selling them. Plus it could add more of a money sink if the accuracy of this happening is dependent on the skilllevel of the youth coach in that skill or if it needs other investment to give the junior that "skill-training".
- Scouting system I would start with the small thing that if people want to recruit players of another nation, then they have a way of doing so, but I would also make this a money sink (scout would need to travel to that country, this comes at a cost). This could slightly damage players from small countries as the value of their players on TM drops a little, because fewer of them will be relevant for national teams (but evening the playing field compared to clubs in higher population countries) and it would even out national competitions a little. I would be ok with a more complex maybe even competitive scouting system further down the line as long as it does not massivly favour big clubs, but I would consider it a low priority compared to things like the international competitions.
Ambivalent:
Analyst I could live with if you want to build more moneyskinks, but such things always favor the big clubs, while clubs like mine that cannot yet afford a youth coach to train the 1 ok youth I have, will just be screwed by not knowing if a youth is actually ok to keep or not (is already like this with the youth coach determining the quality). But I do switch my main coach to youth coach after thursday to at least know the starting skilllevel of the youth players on saturday (this could be considered cheating, but otherwise without a youth coach all youth are seen as "tragic" in skilllevel on saturday.
I like especially:
- atm all clubs have the same chance of getting talented and young juniors, there is no way for big clubs to get better ones when they join the youth club. They will however be better when pulled of course, but this requires a lot of investment.
- the youth team often is a money sink that is required; I don't think many teams make a real profit out of it but it is required to find talented juniors as there is no real way to guarantee talent of bought players as there is no way of making it visible as a number.
I also don't see the problem in 20 y old pulled juniors being worse than 16 year olds that have been on one of our few trainingspaces for many seasons. Some juniors will always be better than others, that's intended to give us emotions, isn't it? We already have a "balancing" taking effect for high-level juniors and yes, skill distribution can be a pain, but in the end most skills are useful in most positions.
If there are too many good players when they are old, then just do what you already did and implement higher levels that can be reached through training or lower the training-speed for high level skills.
Now there is one change I would agree on:
- Main skill: atm we cannot influence "the position" someone will be playing in. I would agree on a system, that allows managers to chose a skill a specific junior will be better than other skills from passing, striking, playmaking and defending (GKs are always with high GK already, pace and technique are too universal thus cannot be chosen). For example if a team does train striking, he could pick a junior to focus on striking in the youth school and then when pulled this would guarantee to make striking one of the highest skills he has. This change would a) not make new juniors better than in the old system as you could still get multiple main skills but b) it would help a little bit in getting a junior the club can actually use themselves instead of selling them. Plus it could add more of a money sink if the accuracy of this happening is dependent on the skilllevel of the youth coach in that skill or if it needs other investment to give the junior that "skill-training".
- Scouting system I would start with the small thing that if people want to recruit players of another nation, then they have a way of doing so, but I would also make this a money sink (scout would need to travel to that country, this comes at a cost). This could slightly damage players from small countries as the value of their players on TM drops a little, because fewer of them will be relevant for national teams (but evening the playing field compared to clubs in higher population countries) and it would even out national competitions a little. I would be ok with a more complex maybe even competitive scouting system further down the line as long as it does not massivly favour big clubs, but I would consider it a low priority compared to things like the international competitions.
Ambivalent:
Analyst I could live with if you want to build more moneyskinks, but such things always favor the big clubs, while clubs like mine that cannot yet afford a youth coach to train the 1 ok youth I have, will just be screwed by not knowing if a youth is actually ok to keep or not (is already like this with the youth coach determining the quality). But I do switch my main coach to youth coach after thursday to at least know the starting skilllevel of the youth players on saturday (this could be considered cheating, but otherwise without a youth coach all youth are seen as "tragic" in skilllevel on saturday.
Logically, when you're a beginner you don't spread answers about what you haven't learned yet. But, good luck ;-)
I have played this game for at least 10 years and was an admin. This is my third time here.
all clubs have the same chance of getting talented and young juniors
Like a lottery, only a few lucky ones getting talented and young juniors. The chance is not equally distributed. You can like this, but it's not true that clubs have the same chances in the end.
the youth team often is a money sink that is required;
Same as first point : a money sink for a majority, a money pump for a minority. In the end the money stay in : it's not a money sink.
I also don't see the problem in 20 y old pulled juniors being worse than 16 year olds
Well, no offense, but after 10 years XP and 3rd try...
Like a lottery, only a few lucky ones getting talented and young juniors. The chance is not equally distributed. You can like this, but it's not true that clubs have the same chances in the end.
the youth team often is a money sink that is required;
Same as first point : a money sink for a majority, a money pump for a minority. In the end the money stay in : it's not a money sink.
I also don't see the problem in 20 y old pulled juniors being worse than 16 year olds
Well, no offense, but after 10 years XP and 3rd try...
I think you don’t understand equal chance. Just because it’s an equal chance doesn’t mean everyone gets the same quantity. Flipping a coin has the same chance for a heads or tails but if I flipped 10 coins and you flipped 10 coins it’s not guaranteed we will get the same number of heads and tails.
Also youth system is a money sink. Money gets taken out of the game. Yes some make profit off it but it’s not new money, it’s existing money being redistributed.
I know where you stand because you’re looking at how some teams seem to benefit more than others off rng but that’s not what was being discussed nor should anyone want that. Equal chance is what we should be aiming for and that’s what it currently is. Perhaps we can remove some layers of randomness and I’d like to see older players being worth something more then what they are for example.
Also youth system is a money sink. Money gets taken out of the game. Yes some make profit off it but it’s not new money, it’s existing money being redistributed.
I know where you stand because you’re looking at how some teams seem to benefit more than others off rng but that’s not what was being discussed nor should anyone want that. Equal chance is what we should be aiming for and that’s what it currently is. Perhaps we can remove some layers of randomness and I’d like to see older players being worth something more then what they are for example.