Divisions - Discussion/Questions....

wakil isco

@menagerbl I think if they counted on medals, then the administration's goal would not become important

timilic7

A new osm survey has been received by a friend unfortunately I have not had ...

SpecialOne

@menagerbl said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@SpecialOne
I have 2 questions, would be nice if you could answer...

Currently, at the end of each season we get an amount of BossCoins as reward, depending on how many MP's we collected. What will happen after you remove MP's? Will we still get BC's at the end of the season?

We'll maintain the end of season bonus. It won't be calculated same way they are now, but the amount of BCs that every manager will earn at the end of season will be similar/the same as it is now.

At the moment I get always the same number of medals if I beat a human manager, no matter which goal I'm or which goal he is. It's always the same...Till now most managers played with lower goals (goal 16, goal 13, goal 9 etc.) just in order to collect more MP's. Does it mean that with the removal of MP's club goals are becoming irrelevant? Why would I choose to manage WBA or Fulham in EPL? Ofc I will take ManCity or Liverpool...

Can you explain please...

On manager points system, the points you get to beat a goal 1 or a goal 16 is exactly the same, the difference lies on the end of season bonus (that's added on a daily basis on manager points and only at the end of season on Medals system). The bonus you get for finishing on a specific position depends on the goal of the team you played with!

MenagerBL

@specialone
Thanks for the answer.

SpecialOne

Is it possible to play OSM competitively and for ranking with medal system?

Sure it is. As I mentioned before when I gave myself as an example, you can play with both goals, but to be a manager on TOP 100 playing in really competitive leagues with really good managers is risky, because losing a match in an high division will cost you a lot of medals.

Playing against human managers grants you way more medals than playing against CPUs, this makes the climb way faster, but it's also risky because one defeat can send you down quite a bit due to the amount of points you lose.

Again it's a manager choice to decide at which rate he wants to climb on rankings and which risks he wants to take.

I'm playing for several years and now with this new ranking I'll be losing everything?

That's not correct, when this new medal system was implemented, ALL managers got their manager points converted to medals system. New users started with zero.

You may say that in a couple days users that were started OSM a couple months before and they jumped immediately to Top positions.... Well, this is what happens in all systems when they are implemented. It's not possible to make a smooth transition when you don't start from scratch.
There were two options: discard everything and every single user will start from same point (it will have to force a system, where everyone had to be sacked from their leagues, etc, etc) or just do what we've done, convert existing points and risk to have a few managers getting some advantages over others.
I believe that we all agree that the best option wasn't for sure to reset everything for all users.

Bottom line, ALL old school managers had their past MPs added to their medals and because of that they started with some advance over new users!

SpecialOne

One extra note about old school managers and loosing all their hard work over the years

Manager points ranking was also 'ignoring' a big part of ALL old school managers hard work

Restimat

@specialone Okay thank you.
So it's "risky" means it's quite impossible to be in the Top 10 while playing high level competitions

Is it possible to count only medals when leagues are open and not private ?
(that would create a legit and fair ranking and also discourage cheating)
Is it possible to give less medals for the result (win/loss) and more medals according to the division of the opponent ?
Is it possible to give more medals against a high division opponent and less medals against a low division opponent ?
Is it possible to count medals only on a predetermined account for everyone ? Not like manager points, because I understand the technical heavier aspect of that, but something new where only 1 entry for the ranking system would count. Like a golden slot or something like that. No more confusion either for new players.

With this kind of ameliorations, wouldn't the medals system be more representative of the managers level, and only allow high division managers that rock it against other high division managers instead of low division managers/CPU's ?
Quite a shame to see that the best ranked managers mostly play closed leagues against CPU's

SpecialOne

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@specialone Okay thank you.
So it's "risky" means it's quite impossible to be in the Top 10 while playing high level competitions

Point me a single manager that is on TOP 10 of manager points ranking that plays high level competitions on the ranking slot?
Also tell me how many of the top managers on MP ranking have performances according to their rankings when they play competitive leagues?

Is it possible to count only medals when leagues are open and not private ?
(that would create a legit and fair ranking and also discourage cheating)

Is it possible to give less medals for the result (win/loss) and more medals according to the division of the opponent ?

Is it possible to give more medals against a high division opponent and less medals against a low division opponent ?

Is it possible to count medals only on a predetermined account for everyone ? Not like manager points, because I understand the technical heavier aspect of that, but something new where only 1 entry for the ranking system would count. Like a golden slot or something like that. No more confusion either for new players.

With this kind of ameliorations, wouldn't the medals system be more representative of the managers level, and only allow high division managers that rock it against other high division managers instead of low division managers/CPU's ?
Quite a shame to see that the best ranked managers mostly play closed leagues against CPU's

About your suggestions, everything is possible, manager medals is not final yet and all suggestions will be analysed and studied. If we come to the conclusion that suggestions are good and they can improve OSM, we'll take them into account when improving system

Majstor Matt

@specialone said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

One extra note about old school managers and loosing all their hard work over the years

Manager points ranking was also 'ignoring' a big part of ALL old school managers hard work

Yup, thats true, and thats why many oldschool managers that were top of the game couple years ago left when this new ranking was introduced back couple years ago. There simply should have been some option to keep some sort of "legendary ranking" that would give contribution to all manager points earned in your career. But okay, you explained to me once already why is that nearly impossible...

@specialone said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

Is it possible to play OSM competitively and for ranking with medal system?

Sure it is. As I mentioned before when I gave myself as an example, you can play with both goals, but to be a manager on TOP 100 playing in really competitive leagues with really good managers is risky, because losing a match in an high division will cost you a lot of medals.

Playing against human managers grants you way more medals than playing against CPUs, this makes the climb way faster, but it's also risky because one defeat can send you down quite a bit due to the amount of points you lose.

Again it's a manager choice to decide at which rate he wants to climb on rankings and which risks he wants to take.

This is pure politicism. You cannot claim in your reasonable sense that playing a Nations Cup and having 11wins 14draws 5defeats (against best managers from many countries) which resulted in me losing overall of -4333 Medals (WITH GOAL 13 team) is the same as it is for mister #1 vlootti who is playing against his friends (I could say "imaginary friends" ) in a closed league where average log in per manager is 2 times per league.

If I want to climb up the rankings, I simply must stop playing competitions and close my league, thats a fact. But okay, agree to disagree.

Restimat

@specialone said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@specialone Okay thank you.
So it's "risky" means it's quite impossible to be in the Top 10 while playing high level competitions

Point me a single manager that is on TOP 10 of manager points ranking that plays high level competitions on the ranking slot?
Also tell me how many of the top managers on MP ranking have performances according to their rankings when they play competitive leagues?

I did not say it was the case and, to me, manager points are far from perfect, even though still quite useful in some way. It's not because something is used but bad that we need to copy that, besides medals system offer things that were not possible before...if well done, therefore my suggestions

Great to know that these suggestions will be analyzed then, thanks for passing them to study

Majstor Matt

@specialone said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@specialone Okay thank you.
So it's "risky" means it's quite impossible to be in the Top 10 while playing high level competitions

Point me a single manager that is on TOP 10 of manager points ranking that plays high level competitions on the ranking slot?
Also tell me how many of the top managers on MP ranking have performances according to their rankings when they play competitive leagues?

I have a one suggestion. Lets make an experiment, and try to call up top 150 managers per medals on to a OSM World Cup Lets see how many of this "TOP level" managers will accept playing World Cup in an open league where they will risk their "precious medals" I can already see half of them telling they do not want to play, even though it is a big honour to participate in OSM WC... or at least it used to be, sadly if Medals will be deciding factor it wont be best managers anymore that will qualify..

Majstor Matt

Anyway, to sumarise. Medals system is like you now come on to a ATP tennis organisation and tell them they all start from nothing and that win in a Grand Slam quarterfinals is same as a win in Challenger in Zagreb. It simply does not have a logic in itself.

SpecialOne

@majstor-matt said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

I have a one suggestion. Lets make an experiment, and try to call up top 150 managers per medals on to a OSM World Cup Lets see how many of this "TOP level" managers will accept playing World Cup in an open league where they will risk their "precious medals" I can already see half of them telling they do not want to play, even though it is a big honour to participate in OSM WC... or at least it used to be, sadly if Medals will be deciding factor it wont be best managers anymore that will qualify..

Do you remember that OSM WC managers (old system, still not defined how it will happen on next edition) were checked before being invited, don't you? Not a really deep check, but good enough to get some of them out of OSM WC

SpecialOne

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

I did not say it was the case and, to me, manager points are far from perfect, ....

There will never be a perfect system. what we're trying to achieve is a system that can please the majority and at same time create some kind of reward to the most active managers.

Same way as we 'advertise' events on forums and other social communities. IF you're not active enough you only get the info on game itself, which can cost a lot.

SpecialOne

@majstor-matt said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

This is pure politicism. You cannot claim in your reasonable sense that playing a Nations Cup and having 11wins 14draws 5defeats (against best managers from many countries) which resulted in me losing overall of -4333 Medals (WITH GOAL 13 team) is the same as it is for mister #1 vlootti who is playing against his friends (I could say "imaginary friends" ) in a closed league where average log in per manager is 2 times per league.

If I want to climb up the rankings, I simply must stop playing competitions and close my league, thats a fact. But okay, agree to disagree.

You're just confirming what I've said.... You chose to get more medals per victory by playing against humans and if you managed to win all matches you wouldn't be losing those medals, but getting way more than playing in a closed league.

If users chose to play against 'imaginary friends' they also take a risk of getting caught (there are days in which we decide to take a look at random managers on ranking and if we find them cheating they got locked)

On a side note, as we discussed the other day, playing against humans, it's always risky, you just need to end up in a winners cup being simulated in the evening and you'll end up forgetting to do your line ups and lose the match (and 2K medals)

Restimat

@specialone said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

If users chose to play against 'imaginary friends' they also take a risk of getting caught (there are days in which we decide to take a look at random managers on ranking and if we find them cheating they got locked)

The problem is not the cheating, it's: how do we explain that it brings more points to play against low ranked inactive managers ? Doing so give them more points than players winning almost everything against active managers.
Whether they're cheating or not, it doesn't matter, it just shows that the inner system is unbalanced.

SpecialOne

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

The problem is not the cheating, it's: how do we explain that it brings more points to play against low ranked inactive managers ? Doing so give them more points than players winning almost everything against active managers.

No, this is not accurate! They only get more medals because they don't lose. If they lose against CPU or other accounts on the league they will get way less medals than you (if they lose same amount of matches, of course)

Restimat

@specialone Precisely, that's my question, how do we explain that winning everything against inactive low ranked managers earns more medals than winning 9 times/10 against active managers ?

(Or even 6/10 actually, someone who wins 6/10 or -even 4/10 against real active high division managers- should earn more medals that someone playing inactive low division managers).

SpecialOne

@restimat said in Divisions - Discussion/Questions....:

@specialone Precisely, that's my question, how do we explain that winning everything against inactive low ranked managers earns more medals than winning 9 times/10 against active managers ?

Keep in mind that this only happens when you're on division 9 and 10, and these are divisions for Top managers, if you lose a couple games on lower divisions it doesn't have such an impact.

You don't expect a system where Top managers have same medals as a beginner, do you?

Restimat

I don't, that's not what I said, I was talking about low division managers opponents (not players). Sorry if the formulation wasn't clear

How do we explain that high division managers winning everything against inactive low ranked managers receive more medals than a high division manager winning 9 or even 6 times/10 against active managers ?