Game Updates

ruipsc5

@specialone
The thing is: who are the best OSM players in the world? Is GB interested in developing a system that helps finding it?

When you have a ranking and you are competitive you want to reach the top of the ranking. But as it is it is impossible to reach it, unless you only play agains CPUs or inactive players in private leagues.

What measures will you implement in order to change it? Can you please clrify it?

Thanks!

FeelStrikeX

@specialone

The "Class" plays the game for years and invests in the game of course.

It doesn't matter to me, because I wasn't a player who played the game for the Ranking, but for one thing that came to replace another, not being able to compare is a fallacy, because naturally it will be compared if it came to replace it, of course it will be compared and an exchange should keep some things similar

FeelStrikeX

@specialone
Other questions.
Why am I at the top of the coach list if I am the one with the fewest points?

Why do the coaches rankings appear in the profile and in the friends tab?

Majstor Matt

@alyssagb
Please assemble a task force that will prevent "cheating your way to the top". My main concern is that this system promotes foul play and given incentive to cheat your way up.
What do I mean? Well, lets take a look at 85% of managers occupying top 50 spots in global ranking, what can we see? We can see closed leagues filled with bots and imaginary opponents that are completelly the same on all4 slots of top 50 user. Please sort that out and punish those who spit in our face in their private leagues acting like they are untouchables.

Why do I want that "task force"? I understand that new cheaters will emerge after these are banned, and it will be an endless circle, but sadly that path you have chosen by promoting this system that kills every bit of competitive play and promotes cheating your way up as easiest way to get to top.

I sincerelly hope that you guys will think about this major problem with this new "ranking of the best"

Regards,
Matija

SpecialOne

@ruipsc5 According to you, what would be the criteria that defines the best OSM manager?
I agree with you, that when we've a rank, one of the goals of all players is climb as much as possible on the rank and if possible reach the top.
I don't agree that you can only achieve it playing only against CPUs, but I do agree that at this point is faster and 'safer'.
Measures to change it are being studied, as the above message says, based on the feedback we got from you guys. But you guys have to agree that it's just not possible that those changes happen overnight. It will take some time!

@FeelStrikeX Sorry, if you got offended by the use of 'class' word, but I couldn't find a better word, since type seemed way worse to me and not all players that doesn't like it are old school... that's why I used class.
About your argument of those managers playing the game for years, as I mentioned above not all that dislike it play for several years, but we tried to minimise the 'loss' of all those players by converting MPs to Medals when we set them live. So a big majority of our users were never below level 3/4!

About the sorting... it's still a work in progress, for now it still sorts by old system. Same as old MPs ranking being visible on Web profiles!

@majstor-matt ~~"ranking of the best"~~ "Manager Medals" ranking

ruipsc5

@specialone Thanks for the positive feedback!

I "believe that we all believe" that the best manager is the one than performs better in the leagues where he is playing. If you play in a G16 team and you win the league you are the "best". And if you do it league after league you are on of the best. It's an universal principle.

However, we also believe that is different if you play in a private league with inactive players, CPUs or noobs and with all the league definitions available (using BCs to accelerate training sessions, buy players, etc) or in a competitive league with 8th, 9th or 10th Division players and with the league definitions unavailable (you cannot use BCs to maximize the performance of your team and the "pay to win" doesn't apply).

If we look at the current system, the alghoritm looks simple:
-if you are in a lower division you win a huge amount of medals, if you win a game and when you finish a league in a good position. And sometimes you even win a huge amount of medals when you loose, because GB wants to motivate the noobs to keep playing and investing. And it's fine for me, because this is a business.
-if you are in an higher division you will win less medals when you win a game and you loose few medals if you draw a game against a lower division player and a huuuuuuuge amount of medals when you loose a game, no matter who is your opponent. At least according my point of view.

And the flaw is in the last part: if you are in the 9th division and you play against a player that is also in the 9th division you cannot loose the same 1.400 Medals you loose when you play against a 6th or 7th Division.
If you change this logic, I believe that the community will be really happy. If you look at the snapshots that are posted in the forum by lots of managers, the main complaints are related to that.
You are managing a G16 team. You finish 3rd. Once you lost 8 games, you finish the league with negative medals. And that simply cannot happen.

Sugegestions:
You can reduce the number of medals you loose when you loose a game against a player that is in the same division as you or one below (if you are a 10th division player and you loose against a 3rd division player it's fair that you loose more than 1000 Medals. You can keep it!)
You can increase the number of medals you win when you win a game against a player that is in the same division as you, one below or one higher
You can increase the number of medals you win in the end of the league when you perform really well (achieving goal + positive difference between your goal and your classification).

What do you think about this suggestions?

Thanks for listening!

Majstor Matt

@specialone said in Game Updates:

@majstor-matt ~~"ranking of the best"~~ "Manager Medals" ranking

Yeah, its not important how we call it, but lets just try and have a fair and cheating-free top of the ranks. Give us "normal people" a chance to reach top 50 in a fair way, without closing our leagues and filling them with bots and multi accounts.

Do that, and do some work on these situations when you lose against managers from same division as some before me have said and I am sure this system has a chance of getting some positive feedback.

Thank you for your feedback and thanks for letting us know that our oppinions are at least read and forwarded to people in charge of making this big changes

KoningCo

@specialone
Can you (or someone else from the staff) please respond to my message about transfer workers that take place just before match time? See my post at 13:10 in this topic: https://forum.onlinesoccermanager.com/post/1126035

I hope the staff won't miss this message now that the discussion about medals started again here.

Alfonzso_NL192

@specialone said in Game Updates:

If you chose to resign a league, you wouldn't have wasted time on that league, because your medals were already added to your total, while on old system, you needed to stay until the end of season to get the manager points conquered!

that's stupid! ofcours you need to play a full season to earn your points. This will only provide to more 'competition hoppers' and empty competitions.

Thank you, GameBasics! (btw i was being sarcastic)

SpecialOne

@ruipsc5 There's already a difference when you play against a lower division manager or an higher division manager, but as you pointed it's probably a bit too small, so yes, we'll be working on balance it a bit more

@alfonzso_nl192 said in Game Updates:

....This will only provide to more 'competition hoppers' and empty competitions.

That's your point of view, but if you look at the bigger picture, you may see that some users just join one league, play a couple matches and resign. Now they will think twice before doing it, because they will risk to lose those matches and will lose medals on the process, so maybe they will start joining leagues from the start and improve their teams on prep days to minimise risks of losing matches. Also they probably wait for last match to get end of season reward to minimise Medals lost during league...
So at the end, maybe the effect will be the opposite of what you were saying. You just need to wait and see how users will behave

Majstor Matt

@specialone said in Game Updates:

@ruipsc5 There's already a difference when you play against a lower division manager or an higher division manager, but as you pointed it's probably a bit too small, so yes, we'll be working on balance it a bit more

A bit too small you say Thats understatement of the year There simply must be noticable and big difference, just as we need to notice a big difference when we are playing with goal 16 team in Spain, or if we play with Real Madrid. Currently sadly, there is no initiative and logic for anyone to take weak teams, and league will be even more empty than they are now

Oh and yeah, great to hear that you will be working on it, thanks

ruipsc5

@specialone You can count on us to help GB to improve the logic.

To balance it more is a key point, because it's really frustrating to win a league with a small team and still end up with negative medals.

All you have to do is to think as a competitive player.

Just look at this:

It's the Portuguese Regional Championship, so it's competitive.
The league is full with 8th and 9th division players.
I won 5 out of 7, including the last 5.
I have -1.584 Medals.
To get positive medals I must win the next 7 matches... without losing any. And we know how difficult it is to acheve that.
This means that all the managers will probably end with negative medals, depending on the end of season bonus.

So all we are asking is that GB takes in consideration this reality.

If I play with a 2nd Division player and lose... punish me hard. But If I play against a pair, just punish me softly.

Thanks in advance!

SpecialOne

@Majstor-Matt Do you've an account on OSM NL? If not, create a new one and you'll see that in lower divisions the difference is quite big

Again, you guys are forgetting the key point here:
The higher you're the harder is to get medals and the easier is to lose them. After all on Top Divisions you're supposed to be:

7 - Word Star
8 - Icon
9 - Boss
10 - Legend

@ruipsc5 You're also forgetting that Medals are not same as MPs and that you see total medals earn so far.
If you lose 4/5 matches, total medals in a league for a manager on Division 9 or 10, depending on how many human managers league has, you should end up with negative medals. If you draw 10 matches and no defeats, it will be totally different, you should end in positive.

What if we replace that value by the expected end of season reward? Will it make any difference?

But I'm pretty sure that after last match you'll get 2 or 3K (if not more) as a end of season reward!

Again, I would like to state that we're looking into fine tuning / balance these values, but you're only looking at the higher division medals, where it's expected that you win pretty much ALL matches.

Do you guys really think that a 'linear' system common to all levels would make more sense? Where no matter which division you and your opponent are, you should always win huge amounts of medals and lose only a few?

Majstor Matt

@specialone said in Game Updates:

@Majstor-Matt Do you've an account on OSM NL? If not, create a new one and you'll see that in lower divisions the difference is quite big

Again, I would like to state that we're looking into fine tuning / balance these values, but you're only looking at the higher division medals, where it's expected that you win pretty much ALL matches.

Do you guys really think that a 'linear' system common to all levels would make more sense? Where no matter which division you and your opponent are, you should always win huge amounts of medals and lose only a few?

I understand that progression is much quicker on first couple levels, which is also ludacrous as people finish one league on every slot and are already level 5 almost lol

Nobody is saying that it shouldnt be bigger loss than gain on higher divisions, that is okay. Problem is that there must be a noticable difference whether I am playing against another "Boss", Legend" (call it whatever you like) or wheter I am playing a lvl 3 manager. If you implement that noticalbe difference even those cheaters at top will have to think of a new strategy because mainly all their imaginary opponents are max lvl 6 due to inactivity.

So for example, If I win vs lvl 10 manager while being lvl 10 on my own, lets say I get 200 medals. If I win vs lvl 3 manager while being lvl 10 myself I dont deserve more than 50 medals.

In other way If I as lvl 10 lose to another level 10 manager I should get negative medals, but considering I played against other lvl 10 manager that should be around -500 medals. If I , as lvl 10 manager, lose to a lvl 5 manager then feel free to take -2000 medals from me if needed. See what we mean? That is our main problem, and that is why these cheaters in top 50 have easy way of mantaining their ranking.

jeffro davies

@majstor-matt said in Game Updates:

@specialone said in Game Updates:

@ruipsc5 There's already a difference when you play against a lower division manager or an higher division manager, but as you pointed it's probably a bit too small, so yes, we'll be working on balance it a bit more

A bit too small you say Thats understatement of the year There simply must be noticable and big difference, just as we need to notice a big difference when we are playing with goal 16 team in Spain, or if we play with Real Madrid. Currently sadly, there is no initiative and logic for anyone to take weak teams, and league will be even more empty than they are now

Oh and yeah, great to hear that you will be working on it, thanks

Doesn’t anyone at Gamebasics play these leagues? It’s not rocket science lmao.

Any leagues with a big difference in squad values these medals need to be done differently!

An example, (I don’t do screen shots) I’m top of the league with G13 in CCW (community league) all roughly Division 9 on medals. I’ve only lost two games………. The manager list shows I will get a massive 150 medalsloads are getting minus and at the end and losing games against all the same ranked managers

Personally I can ignore these medals, I don’t care if I’m rank one, or ranked 500,00k!

But what is the most laughable is how many people will get to high division regarding medals and leave the game because of this. GB and the people what thought of this idea really haven’t thought this through at all. Changing manager points for this is one of the biggest mistakes they have done in the 8 years I’ve played the game. Greed takes over brains and this one is a massive mistake and still they can’t see it. Go to spec savers lads please

You really need to leave things alone that are not broken

ruipsc5

@specialone If you replace it for the "expected" end of season award it would be more positive in terms of daily motivation, because you're not losing medals instantly and you will have to wait until the end of the season to earn your medals. Also, if you leave a league, you have to lose medals. For sure! I suggested that in one of the latest enquiries you guys made.

We don't want always win a huge amount of medals and lose a few. We just want a fair system where we lose a significant amount of medals when we play against lower divisions players, a not so significant amount of medals when we play against same division players and a lower amount of medals when we play against higher division players.

And relate it with your Goal vs Position status. If I am currently in a position above my goal or finish a league also above my goal in a league with 15 other active managers I simply just cannot have negative medals. But If I have a G13 Team and am currently 15th, then I have to be punished. It's not logic and it doesn't reflect the reality.

If you solve this problem the most part of your "problems" will end, because you will stop having negative or deconstructive feedbacks.

If you do it, all the players will believe that they can reach the top of the ranking if they occupy all the slots and perform well in all the slots.

BVBPeregrinus_NL

@ruipsc5
I totally agree with the proposed changes you suggest regarding the medals you gain/loose related to the opponents strength/division and also your own goal/position. This would make more sense for everyone.

But I do not see any point in trying to obtain a good overall ranking anymore (other than 'eternal' glory), after GB has sacked the Top100 achievement.

ruipsc5

@bvbperegrinus_nl Hey! Thanks for the feedback.

It will be a new and different ranking where you have to perform really well and be really active in the game.

It's important that the new players feel they can achieve the top of the ranking in 6 to 12 months. If it's impossible to reach it or it takes years to achieve it... then they will not be interested.

I see it like the ATP Tour. If you win the Masters 1000 and the Grand Slams tournaments you know you will reach the top of the ranking. It can be the same here as long as you play in competitive leagues with active players.

Thanks!

PS - Good luck for the game against the Czech Republic!

BVBPeregrinus_NL

@ruipsc5
I think I need to wish you all the luck (or not)... as I am actually Belgian (Flemish)!

May the best team win.

I only hope you are not planning to do a Closed Training and/or go on a Training Camp last minute.

ruipsc5

@bvbperegrinus_nl

I'm going to Sevilla to watch the game live! Just got a last minute ticket! I'm really happy!

Closed training and 631A CA to surprise you guys!

I don't wish you good luck, then. ahahahah