Experience affecting prices this much?

[Rich1033]

I received a message about money from a former player. Two weeks ago Olva Svarva was sold for a modest 41K. From my memory he wasnt the most impressive player. As a middie he put up 2 1/2*s with ratings of excellent stamina, passable playmaking, weak passing, and inadequate defending. Nothing special by any means. Here is his current info-


Olav Svarva (2887181)
30 years, solid form, healthy

A pleasant guy who is calm and dishonest.
Has solid experience and passable leadership abilities.


Speciality: Unpredictable

Nationality: Norge
Assessed value: 58 000 US$
Wage: 1 080 US$/week including 20% Bonus
Owner: I Campioni
Warnings: 1


Career Goals: 11
Career Hattricks: 0
League goals this season: 0
Cup goals this season: 0


Now here are his last 3 transfers-

7/16/2003 Trollhöjdens BK
To
I Campioni for 225 000 US$ Value: (59 000 US$)

7/3/2003 Toledo Drunkards
To
Trollhöjdens BK for 41 000 US$ Value: (57 000 US$)

5/9/2003 Funkos
To
Toledo Drunkards for 30 000 US$ Value: (45 000 US$)
___________________________________________________


$225,000? Now my first thought was that this is a product of cheating. I checked the IPs and they are different, so I doubt it. So is this just a product of the additional experience factor? Or maybe the new coach system? If so this has inflated prices much more than I would have expected.

Right now I really wish I would not have sold away all of my older players during last two weeks.

[KevinNU7]

what country is his current team in?

[Rich1033]

Oceania? Im not really sure. I will get back to you later when I log back into hattrick.



[Edit- I checked, and the new team is indeed in Oceania]

[damnMikeBrown]

Yup, that was all about his experience. I've been hunting solid+ experience guys the last 2 days, and they all go, at the least, top end of their range now. So a solid middie with decent secondaries would be a $270k kind of guy. . .a solid middie with junk secondaries & solid+ experience would go for $270k+. . .

[KevinNU7]

I think experience is weighted to heavy. I may quit playing this game because it has completely destroyed all my stradegy I've made for the next couple of seasons.

[damnMikeBrown]

Kevin, I'm feeling really down about HT right now too. There is this though. It is killing everybody (except the top couple tiers of teams), the same way. I think probably 90% of us think we're getting a raw deal, the remaining 10% already had their solid coach & some U-20 guy or big time experiencd veteran on their squad.

I'm still hopefull that HT will realise that their experience system is not kosher & put it to a standardised type of system, not unlike training is now.

Look at it this way. At least you're not some upper tier team with a $40 million dollar midfield, panicing your head off about next year & the counter-attack option, like I'm sure many of them are now.

Also, with this game, time matters the most. My friend started asking me, nit picking about his lineup now, with the changes. I think a good addage to go by is to just play your best players.\

In the long run, with the strategy changes, it will help out a good bit I believe. The coaching thing, well, pffffftttt to that so far, but only because they borked the prices. The experience, well, like I said, I hope it gets fixed, because 3 systems now rely heavly upon it. It is also, for that reason, that I think it will.

[Desnudo]

You also could say that 90% of people automatically react negatively to any change (game and life). Your current players aren't any worse because of the change. Give it a season and see if you still feel the same way.

[KevinNU7]

Ya but think of it this way. My team currently pulls 2 stars at each position with 1 forward, 1 mid-fielder and my keeper pulling 2.5 stars. Not bad, not great, but now my best player will probably be 2 stars an most of my guys will proably be 1.5 stars or less because my team is made up entirely of 17-20 year olds who don't have much experience but in a few seasons would be really good with proper training. The game engine has basically set my team back a few seasons which blows because there's a few teams in my division who have been around a couple of seasons and they will instantly be better then me just because their guys are older, not because they have better values.

[NAIWF]

I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but if you're averaging about 2* per player, your team isn't quite that strong. Towards the end of the season I was getting 2.5*+ per player and still finished 3rd regardless of experience. I think you're overreacting about the age thing too, because while experience may help a bit, those players CANNOT improve since they're untrainable. Just my $.02.

[Desnudo]

Low Experience doesn't negatively affect your ratings. And given the way experience accumulates (or doesn't), I would be suprised if the teams that are a few seasons older have much more experience than you. A few of their players might be wretched instead of disastrous. Maybe one or two has made it up to weak or poor.

Your decision, but I honestly don't think you can make a call that something has set you back a couple of seasons until you see how things play out in reality. It's all speculation at this point.

[FrogMan]

Originally posted by Desnudo
Low Experience doesn't negatively affect your ratings.

This might be the most important point to understand. Your team ratings should not be worse this season than they were before. They should be at least the same (that would be with 11 starters with disastrous experience, very doubtful situation)...

It's never too late to start buying some older players with a bit more experience at positions that you don't train. I have 6 trainees that are 17yo and understandably with disastrous experience. But my other players include some weak and even two inadequate experience dude. They are 29 and 31, but who cares, since they play defense and I train IM...

Best of luck in anything you decide Kevin...

FM

[DukeRulesMAB]

I'm not pushing for overreaction or anything, but just saying "your players won't get any worse" is a faulty view to take.

If your ratings stay the same, and your competition's ratings have gotten better, your players have gotten worse, regardless of their ratings change (or lack thereof).

Ratings are only meaningful in comparison to the whole, not in and of themself.

[illinifan999]

Yes, it is affecting prices. Saw one guy with solid experiance/solid leadership that was valued at 5k, go for 93k.

[FrogMan]

Originally posted by DukeRulesMAB
I'm not pushing for overreaction or anything, but just saying "your players won't get any worse" is a faulty view to take.

If your ratings stay the same, and your competition's ratings have gotten better, your players have gotten worse, regardless of their ratings change (or lack thereof).

Ratings are only meaningful in comparison to the whole, not in and of themself.

I agree completely, my point was to comment on Kevin saying that he was getting 2 stars everywhere at the end of the season and that this season he would get 1.5 stars... It should not happen that way...

FM

[Bee]

So instead of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer...it's the rich get richer and the poor stay the same.

Much better...

[DukeRulesMAB]

Gotcha FM, that I agree with. :)

[DukeRulesMAB]

Dola...

I also suspect that for most of us, this won't have much immediate impact. Most US D V/IV teams aren't any better/worse off than we are (though there are obvious exceptions, they are relatively few).

It'll make looking at the older, higher teams more imposing, and it will likely make miracle cup runs less likely (though I think some of the new instructions might help balance that part), but for the actual competing right now, it should not be that big of a deal.

And if some of us are so fortunate as to be in a position to compete with the D III's of the world eventually, by that time we'll have had plenty of opportunity to adjust and add approriate talent.

[KevinNU7]

NAIWF,

I have no issues with what you were saying. I ended the season PIC and managed a 43 so I know I wasn't that bad. My guys are all very young and 4 of my mid fielders popped in the last two weeks so I know I could put up better numbers this season.

Unfortuently it seems youth will kick my ass as other teams have many more older players and they will do much better because of the new rules. If they had told us these changes would occur at the start of season 21 I wouldn't have a problem because I could prepare but with most of my starters having disastorous or wretched experience it is really pissing me off.

[NYFAN]

I'm probably in the minority, but I like the rules. For one, it rewards owners who stick around longer. Second, it's REALISTIC! The best teams in sports (at least the ones I follow, not much of a soccer fan honestly) are ones that have a ton of experience. A team of veteran players that know how to play the game at an average level, will beat a bunch of rookies that are " highly talented" 9 out of 10 times. What this will do is effectively force teams to MANAGE their teams better. By developing a core group of players that are young, along with veteran players, and making the process continuous as your young players become aged veterans. May it require a sudden shift in strategy sure, may you have made moves that in hindsight worked against you sure, but it's the luck of the draw, just like some other team that picked up an old fogie to fill a gap just got lucky. It likely won't have a tremendous impact past the first half of the season as teams make adjustments. Personally, I'm going to wait until all the markets settle down and crash a little, and then I'm going to try and get a bunch of steals.

[Raven Hawk]

Just an FYI, I noticed that weak - solid experience increases the players ratings by roughly .5 stars. Anything below weak, I did not notice a real difference in their performance. Just thought I'd share that.

[Airhog]

But remember, your competition probably doesnt have much more experience than you, so It doesnt matter all that much.

[Rich1033]

Originally posted by FrogMan
I agree completely, my point was to comment on Kevin saying that he was getting 2 stars everywhere at the end of the season and that this season he would get 1.5 stars... It should not happen that way...

FM

I think this needs to be emphasized. A lot of people may be thinking as Kevin. The experience factor will not have any negative effects on your players. It will only give a bonus to players with a decent amount of experience.

Im not thrilled with this change at the moment, but I think it could grow on me over time.

[FrogMan]

Originally posted by Rich1033
I think this needs to be emphasized. A lot of people may be thinking as Kevin. The experience factor will not have any negative effects on your players. It will only give a bonus to players with a decent amount of experience.

Im not thrilled with this change at the moment, but I think it could grow on me over time.

I'm beginning to like the experience change more and more. This will definitely change the way I see the transfer market as far as buying players for positions I don't train. I bought a solid defender yesterday with inadequate experience, he pulled a 3 stars performance. I also got a passable experience/passable defender dude whose best performance in the past was 2.5 stars. I'd expect him to be very close to 3 stars with the new settings. First player, I paid 102k, the second I paid "only" 30k.

I agree that the price for experienced players might be higher, but there will always be some good find, i.e. passable primary skill with high experience, hidden in the markets. Patience will remain your best quality while hunting on the market...

FM

[FrogMan]

dola, forgot to add that yesterday I got my second best ever NSI, 56, with 29.5 stars. That was with an irritated team spirit and while playing an inner midfielder with solid playmaking but only poor stamina (only 2 stars from him). My best NSI is a 57, but with a solid midfield! Give me only a passable midfield (which I know us attainable) and that 56 jumps to 62 :eek: That would be a very sweet kind of rating...

FM

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by FrogMan
dola, forgot to add that yesterday I got my second best ever NSI, 56, with 29.5 stars. That was with an irritated team spirit and while playing an inner midfielder with solid playmaking but only poor stamina (only 2 stars from him). My best NSI is a 57, but with a solid midfield! Give me only a passable midfield (which I know us attainable) and that 56 jumps to 62 :eek: That would be a very sweet kind of rating...

FM

When converted to US, is that a 31 NSI? ;)

[Easy Mac]

I'm currently selling an inadequate experience, passable leadership, passable mid/pass/scoring and exc. stamina player. He's 34, but is going for 25K right now with a day left. Not a lot, but for a 34 year old, its nice. I'm happy.

Per Ahlgård (2406780)

My favorite player (and best middie) over the past year