Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Thema: [GD] International Cup
was mentioned somewhere that friendly will have very small impact on training to give only same training option for all teams but its not on topic lets wait news for training
Great thinking but the issue this has is league average is not representative of the player in the cup.
So in Australia (and I don't have plus so it's a bit of a guess), A-League has an average of about 50,but the top player gets about 68.
Now if he were put in a cup where the average players were 50, is this fair on the rest in that cup to be going up against a 65? They don't stand a chance.
On the other side of the coin, is it fair on the 65 rated player to have yet another competition that he just destroys and really doesn't provide fun, after he has done this all season in the league too.
No neither are fair and he needs a way to be able to move up in to the harder division, but can't because this is based on average league rating.
This will be an issue in a lot of the smaller nations.
I love the thought process but DEVs (@Raul), need to be taking ideas from small countries because the game is very different for small user bases compared to the big countries. And Raul and Mekene already are from Poland so know what it is like from big nations point of view.
The idea is good, but it doesn't work for so many of the small nations.
This is why league is better because that person can move their way up to a level where they play people of a similar level, and can have fun again.
If this cup idea, as it stands now, is brought in, you are effectively killing many small nations because you think it has helped, and how good are we, but you haven't actually added any enjoyment for the small user base, and the people from the small user base get disheartened because they know no new change will happen that may help them for yet another decade
So in Australia (and I don't have plus so it's a bit of a guess), A-League has an average of about 50,but the top player gets about 68.
Now if he were put in a cup where the average players were 50, is this fair on the rest in that cup to be going up against a 65? They don't stand a chance.
On the other side of the coin, is it fair on the 65 rated player to have yet another competition that he just destroys and really doesn't provide fun, after he has done this all season in the league too.
No neither are fair and he needs a way to be able to move up in to the harder division, but can't because this is based on average league rating.
This will be an issue in a lot of the smaller nations.
I love the thought process but DEVs (@Raul), need to be taking ideas from small countries because the game is very different for small user bases compared to the big countries. And Raul and Mekene already are from Poland so know what it is like from big nations point of view.
The idea is good, but it doesn't work for so many of the small nations.
This is why league is better because that person can move their way up to a level where they play people of a similar level, and can have fun again.
If this cup idea, as it stands now, is brought in, you are effectively killing many small nations because you think it has helped, and how good are we, but you haven't actually added any enjoyment for the small user base, and the people from the small user base get disheartened because they know no new change will happen that may help them for yet another decade
Achmid, I understand your point of view and I tried exactly introduce a ideia of partecipation proportional on country user number and on some kinde to mesurement of average strenght of the teams of each country.
I did it respecting an indication very clear from DEV: the participation to higher levels of the cups must be a goal, because in (using my structure names) International Cup 1, for exemple, there will be more spectator, more money, that in International Cup 2, and so on. A second indication from DEV: participation of diferent levels must depend on classification in your country league, motivating team to do his best in your country league.
You are in a limite case, because your team is the second of Australia first division, a country with very low number of users. In my hypothesis, the champion of Australia would partecipate on Champions Cup B, and you would be unique australian team in International Cup 1. For sure, will be wery difficult to you to win a single match in International Cup 1. But your participation would be prestigious, and would bring you a good cash in the home matches.
And more important: would be much worse to admite, for exemple, all teams of australian first division in International Cup 1. without proportionallity between users number and teams participating to international cups. My idea tries to limite this problem,
Is not perfect, but he real solution for small leagues, in my opinion, would be the union of many small countries, as you are discussing in other forum.
I did it respecting an indication very clear from DEV: the participation to higher levels of the cups must be a goal, because in (using my structure names) International Cup 1, for exemple, there will be more spectator, more money, that in International Cup 2, and so on. A second indication from DEV: participation of diferent levels must depend on classification in your country league, motivating team to do his best in your country league.
You are in a limite case, because your team is the second of Australia first division, a country with very low number of users. In my hypothesis, the champion of Australia would partecipate on Champions Cup B, and you would be unique australian team in International Cup 1. For sure, will be wery difficult to you to win a single match in International Cup 1. But your participation would be prestigious, and would bring you a good cash in the home matches.
And more important: would be much worse to admite, for exemple, all teams of australian first division in International Cup 1. without proportionallity between users number and teams participating to international cups. My idea tries to limite this problem,
Is not perfect, but he real solution for small leagues, in my opinion, would be the union of many small countries, as you are discussing in other forum.
Union of many small countries would be the only way for your cup idea to potentially work.
Australia is far from a limited example, 53 countries have less than 25 users in them, that is over 50% of nations.
Australia is a middle example of these.
Take a look at Cymru for example. Little Britain has a mark of 61.2 in his last match. But in the last round, the average mark of the league was approx 37.5
Now according to your system, he will be put in a cup that has managers from leagues averaging around the 37.5. He will go in there, and destroy every team in that cup, after just coming from a country where he is the dominant team. He also won't be able to work his way up the International Cup because 6/8 teams in Cymru are bots, who won't increase average skill.
So now you have a player, who is already getting bored because sokker is too easy, being put in a cup, which is also too easy, but with no way to face others a similar skill as him. And this same thing can be repeated in 53 countries (which is about 55% of the nations in sokker).
This is my issue with your idea. Not that you idea is bad, I like the idea behind the idea, and I think using those proportions to make initial leagues would be a good idea, but it doesn't do anything to help little nations. You end up with these cups, with an annoyed, dominant small nation leader beating everyone, and 31 (in a 32 team cup) or 63 (in a 64 team cup) other users wondering why the hell someone with marks of 61.2 is in a cup with them who are at around 37.5
(Edith war hier)
Australia is far from a limited example, 53 countries have less than 25 users in them, that is over 50% of nations.
Australia is a middle example of these.
Take a look at Cymru for example. Little Britain has a mark of 61.2 in his last match. But in the last round, the average mark of the league was approx 37.5
Now according to your system, he will be put in a cup that has managers from leagues averaging around the 37.5. He will go in there, and destroy every team in that cup, after just coming from a country where he is the dominant team. He also won't be able to work his way up the International Cup because 6/8 teams in Cymru are bots, who won't increase average skill.
So now you have a player, who is already getting bored because sokker is too easy, being put in a cup, which is also too easy, but with no way to face others a similar skill as him. And this same thing can be repeated in 53 countries (which is about 55% of the nations in sokker).
This is my issue with your idea. Not that you idea is bad, I like the idea behind the idea, and I think using those proportions to make initial leagues would be a good idea, but it doesn't do anything to help little nations. You end up with these cups, with an annoyed, dominant small nation leader beating everyone, and 31 (in a 32 team cup) or 63 (in a 64 team cup) other users wondering why the hell someone with marks of 61.2 is in a cup with them who are at around 37.5
(Edith war hier)
I undestand your preference for a league sistem and I m not against it, I only worked on dev's hypothesis, I'm not saying that is the best one.
But only to converse: in the International Cup 3, would participate all winners of 256 polish V division, and there are between them a lot of team with mark of 60. I think that would be not so easy for Little Britain to win his Cup.
But only to converse: in the International Cup 3, would participate all winners of 256 polish V division, and there are between them a lot of team with mark of 60. I think that would be not so easy for Little Britain to win his Cup.
But to converse: Even if he finds one decent opponent, why should he not be playing against others of similar skill? Why should the other 32 teams have to compete with two powerhouses?
Take it to the extreme, if Little Britain rated 80 (which would lift the average to 40 for the league, so still in International cup 3), why should he only be allowed to play against the worst teams, and not the top teams despite being one of the top? It's not his fault his national league is poor. In fact, it would be harder for him to ever rate 80 because of worse attendance, sponsorship etc. so he has had to work even harder to get there, and he still doesn't get to play the best.
These are the issues with an International Cup, issues which are being overlooked.
I don't blame you for not considering them, or not considering them with the emphasis they deserve, you have never had to be part of a small country (Italy has always been big).
I have had the experience of being in Australia when they had their max users and required a 4th division, I understand what it is like to play at different levels with number of users. Understand what 90% of countries (as 90% have less than 200) play like.
The issue is whilst you put a good idea forward which makes sense for the big nations, it does very little for over half the countries, something a league would combat and be useful for everyone.
If Div V Poland, with some teams having marks of 60+ is in the worst cups, that is hardly fair for the majority of users in Sokker who don't have this rating. It makes the cup not fun because people do not stand a chance.
A League people will move around, up and down, until they are in a league with a bunch of people of similar strengths, meaning all 14 matches will be important. They will also get to play important matches all season.
75% of teams are knocked out of a cup in the first 2 rounds. That means for the worst 75% of users in sokker, they will play just 1 or 2 matches in each National/International cup. 50% of users get to play just 2 games. 75% get to play less than 4.
The idea does not work because the average value of leagues vary too much.
Take it to the extreme, if Little Britain rated 80 (which would lift the average to 40 for the league, so still in International cup 3), why should he only be allowed to play against the worst teams, and not the top teams despite being one of the top? It's not his fault his national league is poor. In fact, it would be harder for him to ever rate 80 because of worse attendance, sponsorship etc. so he has had to work even harder to get there, and he still doesn't get to play the best.
These are the issues with an International Cup, issues which are being overlooked.
I don't blame you for not considering them, or not considering them with the emphasis they deserve, you have never had to be part of a small country (Italy has always been big).
I have had the experience of being in Australia when they had their max users and required a 4th division, I understand what it is like to play at different levels with number of users. Understand what 90% of countries (as 90% have less than 200) play like.
The issue is whilst you put a good idea forward which makes sense for the big nations, it does very little for over half the countries, something a league would combat and be useful for everyone.
If Div V Poland, with some teams having marks of 60+ is in the worst cups, that is hardly fair for the majority of users in Sokker who don't have this rating. It makes the cup not fun because people do not stand a chance.
A League people will move around, up and down, until they are in a league with a bunch of people of similar strengths, meaning all 14 matches will be important. They will also get to play important matches all season.
75% of teams are knocked out of a cup in the first 2 rounds. That means for the worst 75% of users in sokker, they will play just 1 or 2 matches in each National/International cup. 50% of users get to play just 2 games. 75% get to play less than 4.
The idea does not work because the average value of leagues vary too much.
Maybe a Superleague would solve the problem of big teams stuck in small countries?
(Edith war hier)
(Edith war hier)
The second: to have a Cup in which ALL can participate facing opponent teams of a value very similar to their own.
You said this in your original idea, but in replying to me, you have proven this will not be the case, as all the lowest leagues will have some managers who will be well above the rest.
You said this in your original idea, but in replying to me, you have proven this will not be the case, as all the lowest leagues will have some managers who will be well above the rest.
Again not a bad idea, but the superleague would only be a way to replace either the champions league or the top of an international league.
We still need something for all the other users.
I didn't even come up with an international league idea, I wanted to combine small countries for leagues, or have cups based on regions, but I am saying the international league is the best option as it is the ONLY option that gives every team a good number of matches, against similar ranked teams, and means that people aren't help back by their own countries limitations (limitations with don't even exist in the top 10 user nations).
So I push for the International League, because I push to make the game more fun, and more meaningful for everyone. The new player who joins this week, through to the top Polish player who has spent years investing and building their team.
It gives meaning to those stuck in tiny nations where noone talks, and it gives vindication to teams stuck in the 3rd division of Poland that they are actually really strong sides, they just got unlucky to be part of the biggest nation in sokker.
It's a win for everyone. And with everyone having a match each week, it means people log on to check that match, which is better for ad revenue for sokker, so more money for sokker, so more developments
We still need something for all the other users.
I didn't even come up with an international league idea, I wanted to combine small countries for leagues, or have cups based on regions, but I am saying the international league is the best option as it is the ONLY option that gives every team a good number of matches, against similar ranked teams, and means that people aren't help back by their own countries limitations (limitations with don't even exist in the top 10 user nations).
So I push for the International League, because I push to make the game more fun, and more meaningful for everyone. The new player who joins this week, through to the top Polish player who has spent years investing and building their team.
It gives meaning to those stuck in tiny nations where noone talks, and it gives vindication to teams stuck in the 3rd division of Poland that they are actually really strong sides, they just got unlucky to be part of the biggest nation in sokker.
It's a win for everyone. And with everyone having a match each week, it means people log on to check that match, which is better for ad revenue for sokker, so more money for sokker, so more developments
Well. you are right.
the important thing for me was exactly to raise awareness the DEVs about how essential is to create cups with teams of similar strenght. My solution goes in that direction, but surely there are other solutions tecnhicaly better. For example, multiplying the levels:
International Cup 1 32 x 8 teams
International Cup 2 32 x 16 teams
International Cup 3 32 x 32 teams
International Cup 4 32 x 64 teams
International Cup 5 32 x 128 teams
International Cup 6 all other teams
the important thing for me was exactly to raise awareness the DEVs about how essential is to create cups with teams of similar strenght. My solution goes in that direction, but surely there are other solutions tecnhicaly better. For example, multiplying the levels:
International Cup 1 32 x 8 teams
International Cup 2 32 x 16 teams
International Cup 3 32 x 32 teams
International Cup 4 32 x 64 teams
International Cup 5 32 x 128 teams
International Cup 6 all other teams
I'm glad you can see the issue I am bringing up and admit it is there in this model.
It means that we can now try to put our minds together and think of solutions to it, if they exist.
One may be to put teams in cups initially by ranking score, and then use the cups a bit like leagues where say the bottom 8 teams drop, and the top 4 teams (the semi finalists) all move up.
It still doesn't fix the issue that 75% users are knocked out by week 2. Unless the losers then play one another each week (and then in the 3rd week, someone who lost 2 matches, plays another team who lost two matches etc etc). This would keep the draw full, users will come across people more of similar level as they move through the comp, and teams can work their way up and down the cups based on their own skill, and not of those around them
It means that we can now try to put our minds together and think of solutions to it, if they exist.
One may be to put teams in cups initially by ranking score, and then use the cups a bit like leagues where say the bottom 8 teams drop, and the top 4 teams (the semi finalists) all move up.
It still doesn't fix the issue that 75% users are knocked out by week 2. Unless the losers then play one another each week (and then in the 3rd week, someone who lost 2 matches, plays another team who lost two matches etc etc). This would keep the draw full, users will come across people more of similar level as they move through the comp, and teams can work their way up and down the cups based on their own skill, and not of those around them
how essential is to create cups with teams of similar strenght
I disagree (because this is only one element to take)
it all can be solved implementing a rank system that use many criteria: best and average %, wage amount, results, league position, fans, stadium, economy, ...
I disagree (because this is only one element to take)
it all can be solved implementing a rank system that use many criteria: best and average %, wage amount, results, league position, fans, stadium, economy, ...
"The Cup will be designed in a way that the higher level you play, the better financial rewards you get, and fans will be more likely to buy tickets. By doing this we are aiming to motivate you to try to achieve the highest possible position in your league"
