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 / Rookie Area / Experience Pops Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2024-07-04 21:11:59 (ID: 100185025) Report Abuse | |
|
What's the consensus currently about the number of plays required to get a 1/2 star experience pop?
Thought it was like 1500 plays... Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-04 21:38:13 (ID: 100185028) Report Abuse | |
|
I think I've seen it stated before that it is not linear....more plays to advance a half star as you near 5* (and of course, we only see the half star increments but EXP is calculated out in longer decimals). I bought a player who I think was at 3.5*, and now, 5000+ plays later, he still is only at 4*
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-05 00:14:25 (ID: 100185030) Report Abuse | |
|
ptdoc2017 wrote:
I think I've seen it stated before that it is not linear....more plays to advance a half star as you near 5* (and of course, we only see the half star increments but EXP is calculated out in longer decimals). I bought a player who I think was at 3.5*, and now, 5000+ plays later, he still is only at 4* Yeah the dynamics are off. EXP needs to accelerate at double the rate is currently. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-05 00:33:50 (ID: 100185032) Report Abuse | |
|
Yeah the dynamics are off. EXP needs to accelerate at double the rate is currently.
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-05 08:44:21 (ID: 100185034) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
I strongly disagree. Of course I want the experience of my players as high as possible and I do not underestimate its importance. Just the opposite. But I prefer the experience grow slower, than to have its role reduced as a differentiating factor. Why? Because when you reduce the effect of sth you have some influence on, at the same time you increase the effect of sth you don't - the random factor.
ps. Of course it might make sense to increase the rate of experience growth, but if at the same time you increase the effect of sth you have an even bigger influence on, potentially. Like tactics, for example. But realistically, the spectrum of options in tactics is already much much ahead in RZA, of what you usually get if the game is to be played virtually, as a set of conditions written in stone. The alternative would be to change our game completely, allow _live_ commands. But that's NOT why we came to RZA, is it. Last edited on 2024-07-05 08:45:44 by jpnwrt |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-05 20:05:42 (ID: 100185047) Report Abuse | |
|
No worries, as long as I am in charge of RZA, we won't rush such gains. Promise!
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-05 21:15:39 (ID: 100185052) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
No worries, as long as I am in charge of RZA, we won't rush such gains. Promise! You see no issue with some players never becoming a rated veteran even if they play 8 or 9 seasons? IRL most players do achieve their best capabilities in just a few seasons and maybe reflection of that would be a positive for your simulation game. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-06 08:36:33 (ID: 100185054) Report Abuse | |
|
I was not aware of the fact my statement would leave room for such a question. Seems, my English is not good enough....
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-06 09:38:31 (ID: 100185057) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse | |
|
punch drunk wrote:
pete wrote:
No worries, as long as I am in charge of RZA, we won't rush such gains. Promise! You see no issue with some players never becoming a rated veteran even if they play 8 or 9 seasons? IRL most players do achieve their best capabilities in just a few seasons and maybe reflection of that would be a positive for your simulation game. There is one major difference between NIRL and IRL - IRL there is _NO_ random factor. To some extent everything is a combination of what's in the heads, legs, arms of those on the turf and on the bench, with the laws of physics. That results in, for all practical reasons, a _long_ list of possible outcomes from every single play. And the impossibility of predicting that outcome 100%. The creator of the NIRL has to decide to what extent he wants the superficiality of random numbers generator to simulate it. And it's not just "lets make it 30%" type of decision. If the random factor is too high, the IRL players (i.e you and me) start throwing at the creator "the game is pure lotto" remarks. And the game dies. But the alternative, to make it very low, can be just as bad. "What is this sxxx, chess or sth?". And unless the game was carefully advertised not as for football fans, but for math geeks, the game dies even faster. You might ask, how is all that sxxx I'm writing here related to experience? The answer is in my previous post, a bit above (hmm... or on the previous page, considering the graphomania of the author of this entry ;-) ). Because with top teams, especially elite teams, very quickly you can reach the point, when all attributes of their top squads are virtually identical. And the mot to promo to elite would drop to next to none (winning thanks only to the random number generator has more pleasant alternatives - stock exchange, anyone? just kidding but you get the point, I hope). Of course, there are some potential medicines. 1. Dont set the limits on players atts. Which reads - rewrite the code completely (because simply removing said limits would result in the imbalance comparable, in EURO '24, to Georgia vs Spain once Georgian players switched to 10-0-1 lineup, at times even 11-0-0, trying to push the impossible goal of tying the score). Not an option 2. Rewrite the code to allow live interaction. Fantastic option. Just find sponsors for Yoda to create a 100 ppl lab and give them extra 100 yrs of lifespan extra ;-) Not an option 3. Start experimenting, reduce this, increase that. And watch the manager base melt faster than the hope of fans of Poland team in the said EURO during the Austria match ;-) Not an option. 4. Offer free alcoholic drinks to everyone at the right age, so we won't even care what's going on in the game. Alternatively, add an obligatory fee from playing, so we will be unhappy but not gonna quit after paying. Or introduce even higher fee, not obligatory but which gives in-game advantages to the buyer that eliminates the chance of a win for non-buyer. 
Not an option. For me not an option. That last one could actually be a smart way for Pete to make realistic money while not having plenty of unhappy posts to deal with ;-) See any other options? Last edited on 2024-07-06 09:48:38 by jpnwrt |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-07-06 20:55:12 (ID: 100185074) Report Abuse | |
|
I think that at the minute we have slow steady improvement of players through their careers which is nice for coaches like me as I can plan for that.
What we don't have is the other real life variations, people get injured and retire at 25, get put in jail, get suspended for betting, and most frustratingly have hot years then get hugely, massively worse. If we want real life speeding up EXP gain, do we want all that other stuff. That you might say is taking it to extremes perhaps, but the reason that performance gain is quick in the NFL is part of all of the above mess of humans and life. Given that I don't want the horrific mess that more realism would bring, it's not obvious to me how this change could help me as a coach or the game as a whole. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Main / Rookie Area / Experience Pops | |
