Menu

Length of Year

Dean Fitz
2002-01-22
2002-01-28
  • Dean Fitz

    Dean Fitz - 2002-01-22

    i think this is an issue that we will need to decide quickly as it will influence what we consentrate on.

    i personally think rl to game ratio should be either 1:4 or 1:2 so we can have a world cup every year ( or every other year)

    1:4 will give alot of games per week though which is probably a bad thing

    side note:
    what football managemnt games has everone played
    i havent seen CM3 (yet) but CM2/97 was good
    i didnt like how PM2(or was the PM3) did its tactics
    OTB 2 i though was good, but it crash to much for me to play it much

     
    • Christian Rygg

      Christian Rygg - 2002-01-22

      I think 1:2 or 1:4 is in the right region, if we should go for the long season (Compared to CM). 1:4 would give about two games pr. day for the busiest teams, I think one pr. day might be enough. Then we would get World Cups every two years, and Continental Cups (Euopean Championships for instance) the others. On the other hand, how many people will play for six months to get a season over with?

      Regarding side note:
      I have played all the CM's that have come out, but not many other manager games. I wouldn't know about PM or OTB.

       
    • Alexander A. Danilov

      i think 1:2 - it's better, i can say that, exist some league (on e-mail) which play 2 seasone in year and all ok.
      i  have played in PM - now FA Premier League Manager 2002.

       
    • Anonymous

      Anonymous - 2002-01-22

      playing twice in one day would be interesting with injuries ... you would have to log on twice in a day, different timezones would mean that we would have to setup leagues in each timezone ...

      lets stick to 1:2 and allow them to modify the length of the season ... have a 10 team league say.

      This comes down to how realistic we make it ... I have been throught this thought process

       
    • Anonymous

      Anonymous - 2002-01-23

      This is part of a discussion alteest and I had on this subject on icq today, I thought I would get some thoughts back on it:

      if I have only a weekend game but you have a midweek and weekend then I have to wait for you ... they game should fast forward if there is no midweek game ...

      maybe an idea is that you make the game turn based ...

      1 turn can represent a set period of time say one week ... say you have 5 players 4 just have the weekend and one has a midweek and a weekend game ...

      1 turn allows
      - 1 to 3 training days ... you choose number of training days
      - 3 offers to buy players
      - 1 round of replies to offers etc

      as soon as all the players locks in their moves or reponses then the game fast fowards ... no use waiting just for time sake ...

      but you must also allow holiday mode ... say I lock in my next two weeks of moves ... ie want to play 442 for first game,  play 433 for next game ... then I should say no fast forward allowed because I might be away during this time

       
    • Christian Rygg

      Christian Rygg - 2002-01-23

      I disagree with some of this, but I did see one good idea, especially if we go for a fictional sport and/or random players/teams: Allowing the player who sets up a league to decrease the number of teams to allow for shorter seasons.

      However, the turn-based game idea is the oposite idea of what wanted me to make this game in the first place. It would be a step back from CM, and steps back aren't good :) The idea was that you have x number of days/hours until your next game, and whatever you manage to do in that period, you are allowed to. This could mean watching the midweek game when you have none, spotting talent. (There should be more information available to those who watch a game that those who read about it afterwards).

      3 offers to buy players seems a bit to restrictive to me.

      Restricting the league to only have games in the week or only in the weekend could be doable, though.

      Holiday mode is a good idea, and it should generally be such a system that there is a default way of handling whatever happens if it must be handled before the players logs on. If a game comes along, and the player hasn't been on the game since last game, a default lineup is available. If an offer comes for a player with an answer deadline before the player gets back, the computer automatically does what the player has set up for default action in this case, and so on.

      One middleground could be to have the players be allowed to set up games as they choose, turn based or not, but have a rigirously scheduled league system for those who want that. This could be the "main" league system. If the game is a financial success, I was thinking of (cash?) prizes to whoever won the league, cup or whatever. This was my original "vision" :)

       
    • Nobody/Anonymous

      just so i can get on the same wave-lenght with everyone i though i would give a run down of a typical week (in real life) of playing the game the way I thought it might run, not saying this is the way is should, just my blurred vission..

      first off i thought that the leauges would run in
      real time, well real virtual time anyway, and that a matched would be played with you being there or not.  i thought the we would have a few leauges running at differnt time zones so u could play in the one that suited you most. eg i join the english league and it runns so that all matched are played at 7:00pm GMT.  but i am in Aus so i would have to be on the net at 5:00 am to see and manage the match live.

      anyway onto the week.

      say i am the Leeds manager and the (virtual)
      fixtures looked like this

      1/1 - sat : home leauge match vs. newcastle
      5/1 - wed : away friendly vs. celtic
      8/1 - sat : away leauge match vs. bolton

      so my week would look like this

      Sunday:
      check league tables and other stats
      arrange training for next game week

      Monday:
      dont log on

      Tue:
      check how players going
      arrange formation, for match day

      Wed:
      1/1 match at 5:00 am my time

      Thur:
      arrange training for next week
      do some scouting / see what the scouts have found

      Fri:
      5/1 match at 7:00 pm my time

      Sat:
      8/1 match at 5:00 am my time

      first let me say that i was mainly consentrating on the matches and just filled in the rest of the week with "junk".

      second notice the match on Friday. being played
      at 7:00pm my time.  the way i see it, is the scotish league would be playing at say +10 GMT and
      since it was an away match the home side would get the time of his own league.

      finally i relised something that i think u guys had touched on before. if we are playing at 1:2 (which i think we will be) then say if someone wanted a frienly the day before his leauge match ( in game time) then when we compress the 2 days done into the single day ... etc etc

      so i was thinking we should allow only certin day to be match days. eg mon, wed, sat. that we could
      map the matches to reallife like so...

      real | game

      sun  | no game
      mon  | mon
      tue  | wed
      wen  | sat
      thr  | mon
      fri  | wed
      sat  | sat

      or something like that. most likly we will want a game on sunday and not in the middle of the week but that was just an example.

      so anyway back to what i was posting about. that is how i saw running in real time and not turn based.  but i am open-minded.

       
      • Anonymous

        Anonymous - 2002-01-25

        who was that masked nobody :) ?

        valid points ... Ok i willing to agree that my turn based idea sucked.

        we have set game days is good idea ...

        I would like to see the client able to replay games, sort of playing a video of the game. If you dont want to get up at 5am then you can watch the replay ... make sure you can download it with out seeing the score :)

        I suppose that goes onto what interaction a manager can do while the game is progressing ... I have created a new topic for this

         
    • Alexander A. Danilov

      anonymous - i think Christian Rygg.
      you think many people can observe the online game?:(

       
    • Christian Rygg

      Christian Rygg - 2002-01-25

      No, it wasn't me who posted that. For realism, I think full time replays should be available if the game was televised, just highlights if not. But we could make an exception for managers of the playing teams, if they aren't there, or if they want to replay it at a later time.

      Good idea?

       
    • Dean Fitz

      Dean Fitz - 2002-01-27

      the masked post was me, i think i was idle to long and sourceforge loged me out or something.

      i like the idea of replays and highlights.

      here is another time question to put to you all.

      what is the lenght of the games going to be ?

      if we have a web based client then it might get a little tricky with a small match lenght. having interactions and stuff means you cant have it too short, but you dont really want 5min halfs either.

       
    • Christian Rygg

      Christian Rygg - 2002-01-28

      I was thinking a much longer game. This should be a highlight in the week/day. If we have a week playing at a 1:2 ratio, the game should not play faster than that either, I think.

       

Log in to post a comment.