Football » English » Suggestions/Improvements

Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 24-09-2014 17:49

[MZUSA]

So far, the only way a manager has to try to deduce the hidden qualities of a youth player, besides seeing how relatively fast they train, is what the Youth Training Camp says about them. And even that is suspect information. Are the three skills where the player has the highest maxings? Or does the simulator deduce which skill this player has the highest potential in and then randomly select a training package from one of the training packages that contain that skill? Or does the sim do some other random guessing thing that we don't even know about? It would be nice if, with a little effort, managers could deduce more reliable information about their players. It would be great if we could add another feature to staff. We already have coaches, what if we added scouts. Scouts, like coaches, would be different star levels at different costs and their job would be to give scouting reports. The reliability and frequency of these reports would depend on the overall quality of all the scouts combined that you employ. A scouting report would come in from the scouts at varying time lengths, depending partly on the scouts' ability level, about as often as a ball is earned in player training. One individual scouting report would be from 1 of your coaches telling you one aspect about your players. The aspects would be the hidden qualities of that player like: how high the potential is until maxing in one or more skills, or how fast a player will train, or what positions a player might be best suited for. A manager would have the ability to ask the scouts to focus on certain areas but the scouts would not necessarily always comply. A manger could ask his scouts to focus only on youth players, or only on players aged 18-23, or some combination of ages or even to focus on one particular player. The scouts could be asked to focus on the maxings of players, or the training speed of players (some players seem to have a faster training rate than others) or more generally what positions are best for which players, something akin to what the YTC tells a manager and could reinforce or refute what the YTC told the manager. Some examples: Coach Jeremy McGuire (Level C) has reported that player Frank Templeton is probably a below average player. Coach Eusebio Gonzales (Level B) has reported that player Ernesto Holmes has an extremely high learning rate! Coach John Smith (Level F) has reported that player Harold Spike is close to maxing out in Aerial Passing. Coach Wayne Gruden (Level A) has reported that player Josiah McCoy probably has a very high maxing in Stamina and Tackling! Coach Steve Fundin (Level C) has reported that player Cliff Johnson should probably be used as a defender. These reports would have some degree of mystery and reliability. A level D coach might be giving you good advice only say 60% of the time while a level A coach might be right 90% of the time. And these reports, coupled with what a manager learns from Youth Training Camp and from observing how fast a player gains balls from the training field would all add up to information for the manager to sift through and learn from. A scouting system like this would add to the realism and enjoyment of the game, allowing managers to learn more about their youth giving them greater enjoyment from being able to better train potential future stars while not really adding too much in the way of advantage over other players, and at not too much cost. An additional feature that would not have to be done but I think would be a great addition would be an additional type of scouting report than those listed above. Every once in a while a scouting report could come in on a new youth player with high potential that could be added to the manager's youth program either as an additional youth or as a replacement for a current youth. Once the report comes in the manager can decide whether to invite this youth to the club or not. A little like real life.So far, the only way a manager has to try to deduce the hidden qualities of a youth player, besides seeing how relatively fast they train, is what the Youth Training Camp says about them. And even that is suspect information. Are the three skills where the player has the highest maxings? Or does the simulator deduce which skill this player has the highest potential in and then randomly select a training package from one of the training packages that contain that skill? Or does the sim do some other random guessing thing that we don't even know about? It would be nice if, with a little effort, managers could deduce more reliable information about their players.

It would be great if we could add another feature to staff. We already have coaches, what if we added scouts. Scouts, like coaches, would be different star levels at different costs and their job would be to give scouting reports. The reliability and frequency of these reports would depend on the overall quality of all the scouts combined that you employ. A scouting report would come in from the scouts at varying time lengths, depending partly on the scouts' ability level, about as often as a ball is earned in player training. One individual scouting report would be from 1 of your coaches telling you one aspect about your players. The aspects would be the hidden qualities of that player like: how high the potential is until maxing in one or more skills, or how fast a player will train, or what positions a player might be best suited for.

A manager would have the ability to ask the scouts to focus on certain areas but the scouts would not necessarily always comply. A manger could ask his scouts to focus only on youth players, or only on players aged 18-23, or some combination of ages or even to focus on one particular player. The scouts could be asked to focus on the maxings of players, or the training speed of players (some players seem to have a faster training rate than others) or more generally what positions are best for which players, something akin to what the YTC tells a manager and could reinforce or refute what the YTC told the manager.

Some examples:
Coach Jeremy McGuire (Level C) has reported that player Frank Templeton is probably a below average player.

Coach Eusebio Gonzales (Level B) has reported that player Ernesto Holmes has an extremely high learning rate!

Coach John Smith (Level F) has reported that player Harold Spike is close to maxing out in Aerial Passing.

Coach Wayne Gruden (Level A) has reported that player Josiah McCoy probably has a very high maxing in Stamina and Tackling!

Coach Steve Fundin (Level C) has reported that player Cliff Johnson should probably be used as a defender.

These reports would have some degree of mystery and reliability. A level D coach might be giving you good advice only say 60% of the time while a level A coach might be right 90% of the time. And these reports, coupled with what a manager learns from Youth Training Camp and from observing how fast a player gains balls from the training field would all add up to information for the manager to sift through and learn from.

A scouting system like this would add to the realism and enjoyment of the game, allowing managers to learn more about their youth giving them greater enjoyment from being able to better train potential future stars while not really adding too much in the way of advantage over other players, and at not too much cost.

An additional feature that would not have to be done but I think would be a great addition would be an additional type of scouting report than those listed above. Every once in a while a scouting report could come in on a new youth player with high potential that could be added to the manager's youth program either as an additional youth or as a replacement for a current youth. Once the report comes in the manager can decide whether to invite this youth to the club or not. A little like real life.

 

Page 1

 

Reply

Last Message

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By geoclphredux - 24-09-2014 18:06

[MZ UKI]

I like the idea of have coaches in a particular skill... like... a Keeping Coach, whose specialty is Keeping and they can assess the potential of players in that skill when you assign him too do so. So you can tell different level Keeping Coaches to look at a player and after a week they'll give you a comment or some advice like. "This lad's got potential" or "Keeping's not really his strongest skill" With different level coaches giving more specific advice than others (for example Class A coaches can pretty much almost tell you where he'll max whereas a Class F one may be vague and incorrect about the player's potential.) I like that idea... but I can't help but think this will give those with a ton of expendable money a massive advantage during training players and how accurate are Class A coaches going to be? If they are 100% spot on it would concern me as the mystery of training your youths would almost be gone completely and those that can afford the Class A coaches would always have a mean young team to come across haha.I like the idea of have coaches in a particular skill... like... a Keeping Coach, whose specialty is Keeping and they can assess the potential of players in that skill when you assign him too do so.

So you can tell different level Keeping Coaches to look at a player and after a week they'll give you a comment or some advice like.
"This lad's got potential" or "Keeping's not really his strongest skill"
With different level coaches giving more specific advice than others (for example Class A coaches can pretty much almost tell you where he'll max whereas a Class F one may be vague and incorrect about the player's potential.)

I like that idea... but I can't help but think this will give those with a ton of expendable money a massive advantage during training players and how accurate are Class A coaches going to be? If they are 100% spot on it would concern me as the mystery of training your youths would almost be gone completely and those that can afford the Class A coaches would always have a mean young team to come across haha.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By dowopado - 24-09-2014 20:59

[BotP]

The mystery of training up players is probably one of the most frustrating part of MZ but also one of the most rewarding if you happen to find a super star. Knowing how a player will turn out ahead of time with expenditure of tokens or MZ money will cause MZ to be a very boring management game.The mystery of training up players is probably one of the most frustrating part of MZ but also one of the most rewarding if you happen to find a super star. Knowing how a player will turn out ahead of time with expenditure of tokens or MZ money will cause MZ to be a very boring management game.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 24-09-2014 21:04

[MZUSA]

@ dowopado: I can understand that if the mystery was removed it would be much more boring, I get it. But it is a management game. And giving us more hints/clues/possible information pieces allows us to manage more, allows the managers who want to to spend more time on the game in a different way. Scouts wouldn't give away the information on who would be a superstar ahead of time, it would be a way to check against the info gleaned from the Youth Training Camp, for example. You would get clues, hints, but it would still be up to you to verify what's real and what isn't.@ dowopado: I can understand that if the mystery was removed it would be much more boring, I get it. But it is a management game. And giving us more hints/clues/possible information pieces allows us to manage more, allows the managers who want to to spend more time on the game in a different way. Scouts wouldn't give away the information on who would be a superstar ahead of time, it would be a way to check against the info gleaned from the Youth Training Camp, for example. You would get clues, hints, but it would still be up to you to verify what's real and what isn't.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 24-09-2014 21:07

[MZUSA]

@ geoclphredux: I don't think 100% should ever be achieved. For example, how accurate are the Youth Training Camps now? Are they 100%? And 100% at telling you what exactly? The three best skills? Three highest maxings? The 1 best skill? The best position? It's a mystery. And it won't give a tremendous advantage to some managers over others, just like some managers really go at it with coaches and youth systems and some don.t it will be a personal choice. And besides, we've got to have something to do for all these worthless ambassadors, no? Hahaha!@ geoclphredux: I don't think 100% should ever be achieved. For example, how accurate are the Youth Training Camps now? Are they 100%? And 100% at telling you what exactly? The three best skills? Three highest maxings? The 1 best skill? The best position? It's a mystery.

And it won't give a tremendous advantage to some managers over others, just like some managers really go at it with coaches and youth systems and some don.t it will be a personal choice.

And besides, we've got to have something to do for all these worthless ambassadors, no? Hahaha!

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By dowopado - 24-09-2014 22:05

[BotP]

Not sure but I think that might have been the intent of the YTC and scouting reports on exchanges in determining what positions will be best suited for the player. However, I have no statistical data on the success ratio of this method. I feel their has probably been some successes.

bleitzel wrote:

@ dowopado: I can understand that if the mystery was removed it would be much more boring, I get it. But it is a management game. And giving us more hints/clues/possible information pieces allows us to manage more, allows the managers who want to to spend more time on the game in a different way. Scouts wouldn't give away the information on who would be a superstar ahead of time, it would be a way to check against the info gleaned from the Youth Training Camp, for example. You would get clues, hints, but it would still be up to you to verify what's real and what isn't.

Not sure but I think that might have been the intent of the YTC and scouting reports on exchanges in determining what positions will be best suited for the player. However, I have no statistical data on the success ratio of this method. I feel their has probably been some successes.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By leonpryce15 - 24-09-2014 22:39

great idea bleitzelgreat idea bleitzel

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By mosmosmos - 25-09-2014 10:44

[ENG]

Apparently in Training 2.0 all of this information is already tenuously available from the training reports. Just no-one appears to have worked out how yet, or at least if they have, are not telling anyone. YTC/Scout Report additionally may or may not provide information. It apparently informs 'best position' and there may well be method to that and how you identify that from the YTC. Certainly don't have that much desire to have it spelt out.

bleitzel wrote:

@ dowopado: I can understand that if the mystery was removed it would be much more boring, I get it. But it is a management game. And giving us more hints/clues/possible information pieces allows us to manage more, allows the managers who want to to spend more time on the game in a different way. Scouts wouldn't give away the information on who would be a superstar ahead of time, it would be a way to check against the info gleaned from the Youth Training Camp, for example. You would get clues, hints, but it would still be up to you to verify what's real and what isn't.

Apparently in Training 2.0 all of this information is already tenuously available from the training reports. Just no-one appears to have worked out how yet, or at least if they have, are not telling anyone.

YTC/Scout Report additionally may or may not provide information. It apparently informs 'best position' and there may well be method to that and how you identify that from the YTC.

Certainly don't have that much desire to have it spelt out.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 25-09-2014 16:16

[MZUSA]

@ mosmosmos: Hey Rob, by the way, right now you've the top team in the top league in the original country, not bad! I've been a manager for a number of years but I had taken a leave from the game and only just came back recently so I missed the Training 2.0 news article. I can't see it in the news archive section so it must be over 100 items ago, and I scoured the in-game manual section on training but I have to confess, I can't find anything at all that's different about training 2.0 in the feedback it gives to managers. If you're simply saying that information about a player's hidden attributes is given in the daily training reports that we already get I guess I can see your point. But here's what we currently get: in the regular daily Training Report we get player name, skill trained, ball gained if any, and approximate amount of change in a certain skill in the form of a circle/pie chart thing. This last chart is the only thing that can give a manager any insight, but it's very limited. Certainly a manager can see from these circle charts that older players generally have lower training effectiveness and younger players have higher ones. But that's about as far is it goes. From what we managers are led to believe many factors go into daily training effectiveness such as: player's age (younger players train faster), player's relative ability in that skill (a player with a higher maxing in a certain skill may train faster in that skill over others), player's distance from maxing in that skill (if max is 10 and actual is 2, training speed will be faster), actual number of ball (if current skill level is 3, training will be faster than if current level was 5), inherent training speed (some players are greater at improving overall than other players), plus some randomness based on each day's normal ups and downs in that player's life. And while all these factors may be good to have in the sim and provide plenty of real-ness, there are so many factors it prevents a manager from gleaning any useful information from one daily circle graph. And if you want a good example, the circle graphs on a player don't always match the actual training camp report. I currently have one youth who trained at 100% in a skill yesterday and another who trained at 77% but both of them have 8 out of the 10 green sections filled in on their circle graph on the daily Training Report. I'm not confident that either of these reports are providing actual information, and if they are completely accurate, then they're obviously measuring different things. I want to know what they're measuring, what is the feedback they're providing? And I think the best way to figure that out would not be to simply reveal the information more accurately to us but to giver us other ways to test our players.@ mosmosmos: Hey Rob, by the way, right now you've the top team in the top league in the original country, not bad! I've been a manager for a number of years but I had taken a leave from the game and only just came back recently so I missed the Training 2.0 news article. I can't see it in the news archive section so it must be over 100 items ago, and I scoured the in-game manual section on training but I have to confess, I can't find anything at all that's different about training 2.0 in the feedback it gives to managers.

If you're simply saying that information about a player's hidden attributes is given in the daily training reports that we already get I guess I can see your point. But here's what we currently get: in the regular daily Training Report we get player name, skill trained, ball gained if any, and approximate amount of change in a certain skill in the form of a circle/pie chart thing. This last chart is the only thing that can give a manager any insight, but it's very limited. Certainly a manager can see from these circle charts that older players generally have lower training effectiveness and younger players have higher ones. But that's about as far is it goes.

From what we managers are led to believe many factors go into daily training effectiveness such as: player's age (younger players train faster), player's relative ability in that skill (a player with a higher maxing in a certain skill may train faster in that skill over others), player's distance from maxing in that skill (if max is 10 and actual is 2, training speed will be faster), actual number of ball (if current skill level is 3, training will be faster than if current level was 5), inherent training speed (some players are greater at improving overall than other players), plus some randomness based on each day's normal ups and downs in that player's life. And while all these factors may be good to have in the sim and provide plenty of real-ness, there are so many factors it prevents a manager from gleaning any useful information from one daily circle graph.

And if you want a good example, the circle graphs on a player don't always match the actual training camp report. I currently have one youth who trained at 100% in a skill yesterday and another who trained at 77% but both of them have 8 out of the 10 green sections filled in on their circle graph on the daily Training Report. I'm not confident that either of these reports are providing actual information, and if they are completely accurate, then they're obviously measuring different things. I want to know what they're measuring, what is the feedback they're providing? And I think the best way to figure that out would not be to simply reveal the information more accurately to us but to giver us other ways to test our players.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 25-09-2014 16:29

[MZUSA]

No, I know you're right, that the YTC and scouting report on youth exchanges does give a bit of insight, but how accurate is it? And I'm not saying I want the exact answer to that question, there should be mystery. What I am asking for is other systems, other ways to test players for their potential, just like in real life. Ways to get another opinion on a player to assess how accurate the YTC for example was.

dowopado wrote:

Not sure but I think that might have been the intent of the YTC and scouting reports on exchanges in determining what positions will be best suited for the player. However, I have no statistical data on the success ratio of this method. I feel their has probably been some successes.

No, I know you're right, that the YTC and scouting report on youth exchanges does give a bit of insight, but how accurate is it? And I'm not saying I want the exact answer to that question, there should be mystery. What I am asking for is other systems, other ways to test players for their potential, just like in real life. Ways to get another opinion on a player to assess how accurate the YTC for example was.

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By mosmosmos - 25-09-2014 16:34

[ENG]

As far as I can work out, Training Camp pies are distinct from normal training pies. (Well they must be otherwise you'd get a full pie either way) In relation to the Training Camp efficiency bar it does seem to be a different entity compared to the Pies. As of yet, not idea what that is. One day of training pie is obviously nothing to base the player on. It need to be taken over a period of time. For example. I have had two players, both the same age, same skill level and same skill trained. One of them was mainly 6 segments each day, occassionally dropping to 5. The other was nearly always 5, and sometimes dropped to 4. Additionally on the same skill, some players training in normal training and gained balls with 82 segments, others took just over 100. Same age, same skill, same number of balls. Does counting segments even matter? Or was that just a side effect of some other efficiency? There are clues, or at least differences in individual players training speeds in comparison to each other, and in comparison to their own other skills. Though I don't know if anyone has actually worked out any relation of Training Speed to Potential, to Maxings yet. (If of course there is one)As far as I can work out, Training Camp pies are distinct from normal training pies. (Well they must be otherwise you'd get a full pie either way)

In relation to the Training Camp efficiency bar it does seem to be a different entity compared to the Pies. As of yet, not idea what that is.

One day of training pie is obviously nothing to base the player on. It need to be taken over a period of time.

For example. I have had two players, both the same age, same skill level and same skill trained. One of them was mainly 6 segments each day, occassionally dropping to 5. The other was nearly always 5, and sometimes dropped to 4.

Additionally on the same skill, some players training in normal training and gained balls with 82 segments, others took just over 100. Same age, same skill, same number of balls. Does counting segments even matter? Or was that just a side effect of some other efficiency?

There are clues, or at least differences in individual players training speeds in comparison to each other, and in comparison to their own other skills.

Though I don't know if anyone has actually worked out any relation of Training Speed to Potential, to Maxings yet. (If of course there is one)

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 25-09-2014 17:34

[MZUSA]

Right, which is why I'd love to have other avenues of information...Right, which is why I'd love to have other avenues of information...

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By dowopado - 25-09-2014 17:52

[BotP]

I attempted to collect data for about 1 1/2 seasons regarding the segments on the pie chart thinking maybe it would give some insight on the players rate of training and possible prediction of maxings but I get bored real easy. I rather have something slap me in the face than collect tons of data. Only thing I got from the short term collection was that youth tend to progress from 75 to 85 segments; from 85 to 95 segments; from 95 to 105 segments; etc., etc. depending on the level of balls and age. I also thought when the segments on the chart began reducing to 3 or 4 segments they were nearing maxings. Not necessarily true. The pie chart and training efficiency bar while in training camp seems to be deceiving. I had a player while in TC that had 8/9 segments on the pie and showing 100% efficiency when he got his 7th ball in speed. I was all excited thinking he wasn't maxed. Dah!!! To my surprise he was maxed. I think Training 2.0 is too new for any of us to have deciphered much meaningful information. Maybe in another 10 seasons, we will better understand what it is telling us.[:O]I attempted to collect data for about 1 1/2 seasons regarding the segments on the pie chart thinking maybe it would give some insight on the players rate of training and possible prediction of maxings but I get bored real easy. I rather have something slap me in the face than collect tons of data. Only thing I got from the short term collection was that youth tend to progress from 75 to 85 segments; from 85 to 95 segments; from 95 to 105 segments; etc., etc. depending on the level of balls and age. I also thought when the segments on the chart began reducing to 3 or 4 segments they were nearing maxings. Not necessarily true.

The pie chart and training efficiency bar while in training camp seems to be deceiving. I had a player while in TC that had 8/9 segments on the pie and showing 100% efficiency when he got his 7th ball in speed. I was all excited thinking he wasn't maxed. Dah!!! To my surprise he was maxed.

I think Training 2.0 is too new for any of us to have deciphered much meaningful information. Maybe in another 10 seasons, we will better understand what it is telling us.:O

Re: Additional staff but for other purposes

By bleitzel - 25-09-2014 18:29

[MZUSA]

Collecting data is boring and I'm not predisposed towards it either, but painstakingly collecting confusing data is meaningless! Your frustrating experience collecting data is a good example of why a scout system would be helpful, thanks!Collecting data is boring and I'm not predisposed towards it either, but painstakingly collecting confusing data is meaningless! Your frustrating experience collecting data is a good example of why a scout system would be helpful, thanks!

 

Page 1