no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Coach supply Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
janos
|
posted: 2012-01-20 13:09:17 (ID: 24956) Report Abuse |
|
Would it be good idea to increase coach supply on the market?
1) On one hand, new teams do not have a chance to sign the quality of coaches, that we had. 2) It seems to me, that the supply of low skilled <55 coaches is rather limited comparing to middle skilled ones. Probably it is the intention of admins that the distribution of supply is not even. 3) Reorganizing of CP's would be easier, in case we face the shortcomings of our initial decision. 4) I am currently struggeling with signing a new coach: My selection is overbidden, as I cannot be online at deadline time. I fire my old coach needlessly, and then desperatley need to sign a coach of lower quality not to miss a training. And then start to bid and fire the old again... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2012-01-20 13:25:59 (ID: 24958) Report Abuse | |
|
janos wrote:
Would it be good idea to increase coach supply on the market? 1) On one hand, new teams do not have a chance to sign the quality of coaches, that we had. 2) It seems to me, that the supply of low skilled <55 coaches is rather limited comparing to middle skilled ones. Probably it is the intention of admins that the distribution of supply is not even. 3) Reorganizing of CP's would be easier, in case we face the shortcomings of our initial decision. 4) I am currently struggeling with signing a new coach: My selection is overbidden, as I cannot be online at deadline time. I fire my old coach needlessly, and then desperatley need to sign a coach of lower quality not to miss a training. And then start to bid and fire the old again... 1) there are always new coaches generated, so every level of coaches should be available. 2) coach distribution is gaussian, so coaches with CP95 are not often, coaches with 70-89 are often. That's intended. There reason for such competion for coaches <55 is, that the community somehow decided to go with losts of coaches with low figures. 3) I don't get that ... Reorganizing? 4) Bad luck. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-01-20 13:41:11 (ID: 24961) Report Abuse |
|
I've thought about this too, and a possible solution to this could be that coaches go back on the coaches market after being fired?
Teams who want to reorganize their coaches, maybe fire 2 low CP AC to improve their other position ACs. In this example these low CP ACs would go back on the market for a new job. Of course if no team bids on them, then they disappear after the deadline. This could help you hire back your old coach as well (if you're the highest bidder) after you've fired him, but someone overbid you on your new coach. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Admin
Contact |
posted: 2012-01-20 14:23:33 (ID: 24964) |
|
Ranagol wrote:
I've thought about this too, and a possible solution to this could be that coaches go back on the coaches market after being fired? Teams who want to reorganize their coaches, maybe fire 2 low CP AC to improve their other position ACs. In this example these low CP ACs would go back on the market for a new job. Of course if no team bids on them, then they disappear after the deadline. This could help you hire back your old coach as well (if you're the highest bidder) after you've fired him, but someone overbid you on your new coach. That's the way it is...Coaches that are fired are going back to the big pool, and we try to use the pool before we generate new coaches |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-01-20 14:56:30 (ID: 24966) Report Abuse |
|
Admin wrote:
That's the way it is...Coaches that are fired are going back to the big pool, and we try to use the pool before we generate new coaches So I guess that's why I can still view my ACs' stats on the pinboard even after firing them  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Admin
Contact |
posted: 2012-01-20 16:48:02 (ID: 24978) |
|
Ranagol wrote:
Admin wrote:
That's the way it is...Coaches that are fired are going back to the big pool, and we try to use the pool before we generate new coaches So I guess that's why I can still view my ACs' stats on the pinboard even after firing them You can see them, as you can see the stats of each other coach you don't "own" |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
janos
|
posted: 2012-01-20 16:50:54 (ID: 24981) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
janos wrote:
Would it be good idea to increase coach supply on the market? 1) On one hand, new teams do not have a chance to sign the quality of coaches, that we had. 2) It seems to me, that the supply of low skilled <55 coaches is rather limited comparing to middle skilled ones. Probably it is the intention of admins that the distribution of supply is not even. 3) Reorganizing of CP's would be easier, in case we face the shortcomings of our initial decision. 4) I am currently struggeling with signing a new coach: My selection is overbidden, as I cannot be online at deadline time. I fire my old coach needlessly, and then desperatley need to sign a coach of lower quality not to miss a training. And then start to bid and fire the old again... 1) there are always new coaches generated, so every level of coaches should be available. 2) coach distribution is gaussian, so coaches with CP95 are not often, coaches with 70-89 are often. That's intended. There reason for such competion for coaches <55 is, that the community somehow decided to go with losts of coaches with low figures. 3) I don't get that ... Reorganizing? 4) Bad luck. 1)Please note, that this case newly registered users do not have the same conditions in coach selection as we had. 2)This distribution makes a constraint on how we s e l e c t AC's. Not all strategies are supported any more by the supply, so we should focus on middle skilled ones, right? Me myself decided for low level coaches, because the introduction of the coach system let us think, that we should focus on YA training, while using many low level AC's. 3)Under the term "reorganizing" I mean redistributing CP points between AC's. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2012-01-22 08:28:21 (ID: 25170) Report Abuse | |
|
janos wrote:
jack6 wrote:
janos wrote:
Would it be good idea to increase coach supply on the market? 1) On one hand, new teams do not have a chance to sign the quality of coaches, that we had. 2) It seems to me, that the supply of low skilled <55 coaches is rather limited comparing to middle skilled ones. Probably it is the intention of admins that the distribution of supply is not even. 3) Reorganizing of CP's would be easier, in case we face the shortcomings of our initial decision. 4) I am currently struggeling with signing a new coach: My selection is overbidden, as I cannot be online at deadline time. I fire my old coach needlessly, and then desperatley need to sign a coach of lower quality not to miss a training. And then start to bid and fire the old again... 1) there are always new coaches generated, so every level of coaches should be available. 2) coach distribution is gaussian, so coaches with CP95 are not often, coaches with 70-89 are often. That's intended. There reason for such competion for coaches <55 is, that the community somehow decided to go with losts of coaches with low figures. 3) I don't get that ... Reorganizing? 4) Bad luck. 1)Please note, that this case newly registered users do not have the same conditions in coach selection as we had. 2)This distribution makes a constraint on how we s e l e c t AC's. Not all strategies are supported any more by the supply, so we should focus on middle skilled ones, right? Me myself decided for low level coaches, because the introduction of the coach system let us think, that we should focus on YA training, while using many low level AC's. 3)Under the term "reorganizing" I mean redistributing CP points between AC's. 1) that's right, but it's not like it was in the starting phase, because now almost all old managers having their coaches. Not that many are needed, now. But it's Peters decision .... 2) Yes ist does. There are several other strategies, they were not discussed, but they are there. 3) that would destroy the idea of a coach market. In that case you could just higher a BODY and then give that body the CPs you like. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
janos
|
posted: 2012-01-22 20:08:28 (ID: 25246) Report Abuse |
|
Well, if Peter and staff is completely aginst the idea, or is not in line with further development plans, then just ignore it...
I think it would be useful to implement more coach supply in a limited timeframe. In the off-seasons. 1) New users, who recently registered RZA have a chance to sign good coaches, as we could. So equal condition for all. 2) In the off-season old teams normally perform: -some players transfers -rethink training strategy -hire new staffs, that fits to new season financing... So they might find the possibility of coach changes useful. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Admin
Contact |
posted: 2012-01-22 20:11:21 (ID: 25248) |
|
Janos, I am not against it. I would like to wait for another 2 or 4 weeks before I change anything on the number of created coaches. I just want to see how the thing evolves.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Coach supply | |
