Sep 21

On The Forums – Clarity Mixed With Rage

 

A fairly active general discussion forum over the last week. This time I’ve tried not to limit myself to just the top five and have not kept to just ideas (although this is my favourite topic in the forums!). As per normal I’ve ignored the questions on whether a game world is going to open, adverts for GWs (including my home Hoddle) and requests for FM2009 help. So here we go, with less than two weeks until 1.3 launch, sit back and get prepared for what I think is a few inspirational moments, visible peaks of clarity and maybe a couple of rage threads.

Challenge All Opponents
started by Fm-View on the thread http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=147757

“A feature such as challenge all online opponents at the click of a button would be very handy, and would challenge everyone online that you need to play (that’s not on DnD).”

This is a genius idea. The good points about it is that you do not need to click on each opponent in your opponent list. Although it doesn’t seem like a big deal for some, if you are in an active comp with many not on DND you’ll find that you have a number of opponents so you click on one to challenge, another then another. You may get to the fifth challenge before someone accepts.

A valid point was brought up by VoodooChild in the thread about an increase in “player is already playing in a match” but then this happens anyways, it’s not the challengers fault that they want a game immediately. I’d have thought it would be more annoying to someone that does not want to play and gets a challenge, but then I guess that is the beauty of DND. :)

Maybe this could be integrated into the “wants match” options so that it actively challenges types of comps that you want to play rather than being passive to challenges from others (i.e. an aggressive green ball). Maybe you could leave yourself on this setting while you’re online. Mark Burton recently brought up an interesting idea for an optional FA where you could be essentially on “wants match” – maybe this would be a less aggressive alternative?

Rejecting challenges by starting a match elsewhere
started by Ackter on the thread http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?p=3860387

“I’ve noticed people who appear to be signing out and back in to avoid rejecting match challenges/AI rights – does this actually work”

A point for discussion, it appears that the myth has returned that if you are challenged and sign out and back in that you are not rejecting a challenge. This was deflated pretty quickly but another point was raised by Bill Shankly in that if you start a match when you are being challenged then this does not count as a challenge.

Ov Collyer confirmed this:

  • “If you sign-out then any challenge you have *made* that has stood for less than 3 minutes is withdrawn and thus doesn’t count.”
  • “If you sign-out then any challenge you have *received* is considered rejected by you.”
  • If you start a match then any other challenges you have made or have received are discounted, i.e. it treats it as if they were never made in the first place, so nobody gains.”

Good discussion followed about how this makes it easy to essentially reject a match without it counting, either by starting a youth match or another match just to avoid giving up AI rights.

Ov Collyer suggested “Maybe something like this then”:

  • Start Non-FA match => Rejects any FA challenge (Youth or Senior).
  • Start Youth FA match => Rejects any Senior FA challenge.
  • Start Senior FA match => Rejects now.
  • Not sure about making UFFA > FA though.

I’d agree with Mark Burton’s following comment that UFFA is < FA for the current set-up. Hopefully this makes it’s way into the game soon as I think it’s a useful addition.

Queuing skills
brought up many times before in the past but credit this time to jags4ever on the thread http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=147974

The queuing of skills has been asked for over the course of while I’ve been playing the game. The opposition to it has always been the casuals are getting the advantage and where is the advantage to those that play the game in a more hardcore fashion. The losing of 1/2 skill points when you’re not learning ensures that the current loss is not quite so bad but what steps can be taken?

Marc Duffy states that this is in the road map, but it makes me question how this will be brought in. Currently my strategy for learning skills is learn short ones when online and leave long ones for when I’m not. Thinking about the casual user, I can see why this is a pain as the time online may not be enough for one skill, so you either lose skill learning time or you have multiple skills that are partially learned.

I’m a casual user in the beta game world Miller so have some feel for skill learning. I tend to just stick massively long skills on as soon as I can and learn shorter ones when I know that I have the opportunity to log in the next day so I lose less lost time. Being a casual user in season 4 or 5 is really not much different to being in the first few weeks of a game world as a daily rankaholic in terms of strategy.

I often hear stories about people setting alarms to wake up in the early hours to change their skills over. I think this makes the difference between a casual and rankaholic although I’m certain that some casual users will log in to change skills and then get drawn into spending a little bit longer. The question is whether skill queuing would make casual users more casual or not.

My preferred introduction would not be an unlimited number of skills to queue. I feel that this will take the skill learning strategy away from the game. Ideally it would not be time-based either. Queuing skills for a day or for a week will just prove to be an administrative nightmare for both active and casual users. So it only leaves a number of skills to learn in a mini-batch. Say this number was three or five. You queue them up and then let them go. What this means is that you can set a combination of skills to make the best use out of your offline time. I think that this would benefit both casual and active user.

The Best of the Rest:

What is the point in feedbackhttp://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=148430 by The Big D

It’s something that I think most people would agree with. Long since has the time gone when feedback was meaningful. The addition of community awards and exclusion of mods was a great step forward but what does a good rating actually mean and when was the last time you saw negative feedback given without a game, set and match of feedback tennis?

Inactive teams with cash to splash on return - http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=148073 by The Big D

It’s again a topic that has really come to the attention of managers since the game went live and you get either horders of good players until zimmer-era or you get managers returning from a period away to find themselves with a decent credit rating. This thread talks about how annoying it is that a team can buy one player and then “disappear again“. The counter argument was that the money stimulates the transfer market. A good idea was brought forward to ensure that a team has a team of X players before being able to make a bid, hence you don’t get a team with a Rooney and no-one else. The other point about someone spending too large was diverted to the moderators responsibility.

Regens are rubbishhttp://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=144151 by (the legendary) T-Bag

A fresh step back to see some issues in the gameworld after some maturing. This spans a couple of pages in a couple of forums so I’ll try to summarise. Judging potential is learnt to find the best youth which are then bought to develop. They do not develop as envisaged by many managers. Some interesting points in this thread that I’ll leave you to read. :)

Best XIhttp://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=148675 by krispos

Essentially a hall of fame where your best starting eleven is displayed. A feature that would give a bit of spirit to a team.

Repair stadium every dayhttp://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?p=3885109 by dr p wigwam

A question about the linearity between repairing costs and time between repairs was questioned. Rob Cooper reveiled that the relationship is non-linear. What this means is that it’s cheaper to repair your stadium every time you log in than leaving until it needs to be repaired.

Written By Rik Stewart
A long-standing beta tester for FM Live, Rik is a moderator on GW Hoddle and responsible for their game world blog at hoddlelegends.blogspot.com.
Interested in more? Here are some related articles for you!
blog comments powered by Disqus