48 vs 60 vs 90 actions

[CAJUN]

I have always played 90 actions for the strategy. Recently, I switched to 48 actions since that seems to be the default. I played two very boring seasons with 48 turns. The second season I won the league with less than 10 goals (all 1-0 wins) and the rest were 0-0 ties. I play a normal tactic with 4 to 6 defenders and 1 FW, the rest MFs. I quit the playthrough due to too little strategy involved and lack of fun. I am now playing 60 turns which is a little more fun, but not even close to 90.

I hope the game can be balanced for the number of turns selected, even 90. It seems like an easy fix by just multiplying stats and specialization points. Hard mode would be more of a challenge with 90 turns and balanced statistics because the player would get less glory at the end of the season (my GK won't be first in saves when I win the league/my FW won't win the golden boot when near relegation) and ai teams would develop faster with more specialization points.

The regular transfer list still needs work to offer cheaper/less developed players. It makes it no fun when you have to wait years to make a decent transfer because 80% of the players are unaffordable unless you sold half of your squad. Why can't you select a cap on value for the transfer list? My scout doesn't need to bring me players that are so outrageously expensive. Its like Everton scouting Neymar . . . there is just no point.

The new interaction screens are a welcome change. Closing in on 600 hours spent on this game is great, but I am still hoping for a few seemingly simple changes to add more fun to the experience.

Cajun

[twitch.tv/jeremdelsol]

I totally agree with both of you on lenght of a game, and the need of balancing it to be close to what it should be for the unbalanced aspects. World simulated on 48 actions even if you play 90, spec points progression etc etc...

As stated elsewhere, I really like how transfer list works, it sure may be improved, and it may be hard to find someone on the very first season, but after that it's a regular thing to find a good affordable element to add to your team, even without developping scouts ( but doing it helps ), after trying playthrough with academy + coaches vs academy + scouts... I prefer scouts, it will give you more choice and more quality over time. Actually I'm always waiting to the next transfer period because it turned to be a very fun part of my actual campaign. And about high costs... Yes, there is always unaffordable players, but if limited you may not see the bit high cost player you want to add and would be ready to sell an extra player to get him.
To give data, I bought 3 players in the very first transfer period of my actual campaign, and another one the same year. In a total of 8 years of campaigning I bought 20 players, without, of course, taking account of youngsters. I must admit 2nd to 3-4th season it was a bit slower than next years, but it's also the time you need in hard mode to convert your starters in a bit of money makers. To me it feels like a regular amount, but I don't know too much about football world and it might need to be higher ?
This data is just to feed the debate and give example, we all have different way to play the game.

Originally posted by CAJUN:

The new interaction screens

What screens are you talking about ?

[Kolakhan]

In the amatuer league and was just offered a 1.5 MILLION defender!! Of course this needs to be addressed. It's bad enough that there is basically no trading going on between ai teams so the list doesn't change and you are offered such a small selection (5) to begin with. To have a valuble slot taken up by someone like that is rediculous. The entire trading system IMO needs an overhaul. Paying global scouts every year when you buy a coach level once and get that benefit always is another issue I have. Getting stuck with 4 34+ year olds which I never use in the beginning is another issue. Why the heck did the devs add another year to the starting players? Everything that was done such as the reduction of the number of available local players simply holds you back from developing a team. You get "chicken feed" in the way of money early on and just to keep playing the game you have to sell off anything decent you developed. I contend the overall economic and trading needs an overhaul.

[DeWitt]

I don't really know what's wrong with the transfer list!

As soon as you have updated your scouts a bit it gets more and more interesting. Ages are evenly distributed, AI market activity in the higher leagues is good. Of course you don't find a good player every 6 months, but I'm always eager to see what's on the market every time it opens up.

I'm in premier league now (48 turns, normal mode), and I have never ever used the global list so far. Which does not speak for the global list but certainly not against the personal list.

The starting older player you can use for important matches in the cup. Also KoS stated it's meant to get used to the skills for new players. Fine for me.

[CAJUN]

Krovax,

May 10 announcement on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/FootballTacticsGlory/posts/677440965920227

[twitch.tv/jeremdelsol]

Oh, I was wondering what I missed that was already in game... :) Those yes, I saw it. :D And yes, they look beautiful. Plus some improvement on it. Can't wait for it.

[_K_o_S_]

The main problem for 90 actions is that there are more possibilities to score which is not realistic. I doubt we can do anything with that. The spec xp problem will be fixed.

I personally like either 48 and 90 actions. But 48 actions makes you make the important decisions fast. Because the time is ticking. And that makes the matches somehow more interesting [for me]. If you used to play the game in the way you play 90 actions (slow building up the attack), 48 actions might look boring because you used to think differently. It doesn't mean 48 actions is bad, it means that you play it differently. However, I might be wrong. That's just my observations.

Regarding transfers, I can't agree. You can unlock the transfers from the lower leagues and buy cheap players there. The scout always finds the players from your current league until there aren't players who can be sold.

[twitch.tv/jeremdelsol]

I played a few 48 action seasons lately to test it now I have some knowledge about the game, and while I could adapt to the playstyle and I could have fun with it, I still think the overall deepness and strategy from 90 actions appeals me more. 48 actions has it too, but as it is reduced by half the time, you end to try actions more often more risky and rng driven. While I like risk and rng, in too many games I felt the rng fact was too heavy because of how duration of the game affect it. In the other hand, I totally loved the results being more realistic. Later I might run both modes to play each depending on my mood.

[CAJUN]

Kos,


To each, his own. No one is right or wrong. It's just about preferences and enjoyment. For me, 48 turns leads to luck playing a big factor. Employing strategy and tactics is much more fun than relying on the luck of the roll. I am currently in season 2 of a 60 turn setup.

For 90 actions, can the statistics and scores be fixed as well? This will make the glory fairly awarded at the end of the season. And, it would reduce the player advantage while in hard mode. It seems to be an easy fix. Just double all stats and scores for ai vs ai games.

I agree that the global transfer list helps. My frustration is with the personal list at the start of the game when that is all you have (for several seasons). For the future, I will leave this topic alone.

Thanks for the reply.

[19821103]

I've never played with more than 48 turns and completed around 20 seasons in total. The problem with low-scoring games (0:0, 1:0, 0:1) only appears in the lower leagues. As soon as you get skilled players to raise actions per turn you won't have this problem anymore.

[DanielHall15]

I agree that skills fix everything that appears at first to be an issue in 48 turns. Yes, it can be a 0-0 parade in the first seasons. The problem is that even in the lower leagues, defenders and goalkeepers get bonuses or have intrinsic abilities that an attacking team often can not overcome, except with dumb luck, because they lack offensive skills, or have skills that don't match up well.

Once you can build your team for a few seasons and sort out the players that don't get you along, and grow the players that you need, low scoring affairs are over.

On the other hand, in 90 actions every other game seems to end like 5-2 or 7-3 as Krovax has illustrated recently. It is not balanced (except in simulating something more akin to what here is Class A soccer, roughly eighth league on the ladder), and I doubt that it can ever be balanced without adding more defensive bonuses in that mode only.

48 actions however is balanced in the long run, and this balance should not be disturbed by wholesale changes just to please the 90 crowd.

[Xas]

Nothing is balanced, regardless of which Action choice.
3-5 Goals 48 Action in a Brute Force Offense or
6-8 Goals 90 Action Artistic Tactical Game with a 'lowly team' is doable.

As long as there are rewards for 5 goals difference,
more goals, more incentive for sponsor or individuals.
Anyone could set the bar.
Unless its the feeble minded that can't outsmart the AI.

Unless one prefer to stick with newbie players for challenge,
or prefer to beat treble in shortest years,
'Long Run',
no AI could win the user, lest talk about balance,
'Any' two star team could beat a five star team anyday, with a Human brain.