So i have a couple ideas for this game that I'd like to share. It's a little long but please bear with me and let me know what you think.
1) Knowing how tired our players are is very important to their performance, but knowing exactly how their activities affect them would be too much. Instead, a vague report detailing what each player did the previous day (5 ranked games, 10 training sessions, 6 streaming sessions) would go a long way towards figuring out a good schedule for our players.
2) Having coaches is incredibly important, but now that I've got some coaches it's hard for me to replace them. I don't want to fire a coach, bid on a new coach, and then lose and not have all my coach slots filled for that day. To solve this, I propose the following system: Be able to rank your coaches. Have a checkbox for "Fire coach if new coach acquired" where it would fire your lowest ranked coach if and only if you won a bid on a new coach. Also be able to rank coaches you have given offers to so if you win multiple offers you get the coach you want. (I would limit the ability to make multiple offers to around how many coaching slots you have so people can't just put offers on every coach and be guaranteed a coach with no strategy involved).
3) Stop giving out hidden elo. This gives the top players an advantage over everyone not on the list because they know that they're strategy works hands down and a lot of the guessing goes out of it. A manager should only know how well they are doing from information presented in the game, not from behind the scenes by the devs.
4) Sometimes one strategy works but only if you are on a specific side of the map, due to picks and bans. This could of course be solved with separate strategies for blue and purple sides. I'm sure this is already on the radar but I thought I'd bring it up here. There are more ideas I have for strategy but I know there is already a lot more planned. I just think this should be a priority.
5) Too many people are selling their star players immediately and causing the competition to be too lopsided. I've found it's hard for me to know if I found a great strategy when I play somebody with two star players that simply overpower me with a weaker strat. To prevent this I think players in the first year of their competitive contract should have a no trade clause for one year, whether this is your starting roster or a new player acquired through the market, academy, or scout. Teams should be developed over time. There shouldn't be a super team in the first season, or even the second. Some teams will have an advantage with this change right away, but teams should normalize after a season or two.
6) And speaking of terms of a year, I haven't been able to find anywhere on the site how long a year is (I think one season is one year?) As well as anything that describes how a player's age affects their performance or that a player even has an age that affects them.
That's all from me for now. I have more ideas but I feel like that what I've already set is a lot to talk about. What do you guys think?
1
Hi Arram!
1) This is something that we have discussed many times and we have already planned on improving the reports, something similar you suggested is coming up. 2) This is something we have to think on. 3) Would like to know what others think about this? 4) Coming soon! 5) This is something that will probably solve it self in time as the economy balances out and players get stronger, then no one will want those starting players. Keep in mind this is the first season! 6) 1 month = 1 year. The younger the player the faster it will train in the academy. Next week I will be adding a guide on how it works.
Thank you for your feedback!
1
1) A lot of the fun I get out of this game is NOT knowing, and using hypotheses and guesses and experimentation to figure out how the system works, so I'm actually okay with not knowing since the people that make the effort to solve these systems give an advantage to them and their club.
2) I consider this part of the penalty for switching the coach; the penalty isn't in the firing fee, but in the loss of training for a day. Otherwise people would trade in all their coaches daily. It feels bad, but is necessary.
3) I'm okay with this as long as hidden Elo stops being a criteria for initial seeding into brackets, and if we started using Team Ranked Elo instead so we know where we're gonna end up. That way the Team Ranked Elo becomes the real source of truth, rather than having to save up scrims to specifically target the high elo people in sandbox to farm their Elo with a blue-side strat.
4) I don't think it makes a huge difference. One thing I would like to see though is that a challenger should be Purple side and NOT blue side so that way blue side (the defender) has a first pick advantage. In the actual game, this is evened out because you can counter-ban, but since bans are at the same time it's just always an advantage to challenge someone and get to pick a strategy against them AND pick first.
5) I would be all for this if this was in before the game started. There should be no reason to sell your star player unless you acquire a stronger one. Perhaps star player can have a specific contract that says that "As long as I am highest in my stat on the team, I cannot be traded until a season has passed." This would stop a lot of new account creation abuse since waiting a whole season to try and fix the market wouldn't work anymore. The problem with this is the many people who have already acquired 2 or even 3 star players, as this would FURTHER solidify their power. Because of that, I don't think there is a fair way of dealing with it aside from reimbursing the costs of the star players with interest or giving star players to everyone else and just raising the minimum average stat to be just as high to level out the playing field. Either choice is INCREDIBLY risky, when instead we can just wait a few seasons and the economy will even out by itself.
6) Yeah, age should DEFINITELY be included in the market, as should other stats like personality, reputation, etc. People should get to know what they're buying.
1
As for Point 3) i dont think it does any harm to present the Best Hidden Elo Teams, as it gives you an idea of who's strategy is working good. 6) I definitely have to agree with Xela here, the Market needs full transparency, otherwise there will never be like a balanced economy if people dont know how old the Players they bid on are. Same applies for Personality.
