Exclusive Elite gyms with few members and low fees

[Guest]

maui, this is nothing against you but i dont see your idea serving as a solution to the problem but not only making the problem bigger.

 

as it is now, these private gyms are joining and unjoining many fighters but only getting the oppurtunity to train just 2 or 3 certain ones. but if you make the training so that 3 to 1 is equal to 1 on 1 then doesnt that just allow them to keep more of there fighters in the gym? they can still operate under cost but now they'll just get super training for more of there fighters?

 

basicly this would allow them to operate under cost but on a larger scale. i may have missed the point. if i did then i am sorry but to me as long as you allow gyms to operate under cost then there will always be an advantage

[LeviAJones]

as it is now, these private gyms are joining and unjoining many fighters but only getting the oppurtunity to train just 2 or 3 certain ones. but if you make the training so that 3 to 1 is equal to 1 on 1 then doesnt that just allow them to keep more of there fighters in the gym? they can still operate under cost but now they'll just get super training for more of there fighters?

 

1. private gyms are generally operating at a cost due to the wealth amassed in previous ventures. fighter shuffling is absolutely the biggest waste of time and least effective way to run a private gym.

 

2. at $600 a week, it takes slightly less than 5 fighters to support an elite coach. that means it is easy to run an elite gym with under 5:1 ratio.

 

3. get the sand out of your vag and go back to playing the game. it's meant to be fun. stop wasting your time crying and whining.

[backelie]

1. private gyms are generally operating at a cost due to the wealth amassed in previous ventures. fighter shuffling is absolutely the biggest waste of time and least effective way to run a private gym.

 

2. at $600 a week, it takes slightly less than 5 fighters to support an elite coach. that means it is easy to run an elite gym with under 5:1 ratio.

 

3. get the sand out of your vag and go back to playing the game. it's meant to be fun. stop wasting your time crying and whining.

 

1) The # of people that can run a gym with fighter shuffling is a little bit bigger than the # of people who can do it on manager funds only, don't think fighter shuffling doesn't happen.

2) Single elite, yes, double elites not so much.

3) Discussing potential improvements is not "crying and whining".

[backelie]

Doesn't this just make it easier/cheaper to have a private gym? Now, instead of hiring 5 coaches at whatever 5 coaches costs, someone could hire 1 coach, and get the same training for 5 fighters.

Yes, but I think it also significantly lessens the need for one.

 

Lastly, this will increase the speed of training for a large majority of the population - something which I think Mike has stated he is not in favor of. IMO, fighters already learn a bit fast - not too many people in the world go from no BJJ knowledge to being a black belt in a year. If practically everyone in the game is training with what is comparable to 1on1 with an Elite coach, I don't think it is out of the realm of possibility that we'll have Double Elite fighters with all associated secondaries Elite in short order. I would think, under this proposal, that the effectiveness of training, or coaches, would need to drop significantly here to equal out.

I agree training is fast already, but whether this suggestion slows or speeds training overall is just a tweak of the numbers, you could make it so eg 1-4 on 1 training gives the effect 3on1 has today, slowing it for the best/"worst" elite gyms, improving it slightly for others.

[santa]

you would have the same benefit from a 12 elites, 85 member gym, than a 1 elite, 1 member gym.

 

In conclusion all those that can not fund a private gym with their 2nd company can get the same quality training than those that have a 2nd company

[Guest]

I think training does need to be slowed and making it so 1-1, 2-1 and 3-1 is as good as 4-1 is now may help alleviate part of the problem as you can run a gym normally with those numbers and all the effort being put into keeping it 1-1 is a waste.

 

In fact is there not already a cap on how much you can learn per session? Just raise that so its a waste of time to keep teaching 1-1 useful.

[Guest]

Lastly, this will increase the speed of training for a large majority of the population

You can change it the other way around, which makes more sense to me. Making training for 1o1 and 2o1 just as effective as now 3o1. Would still have the same effect without the disadvantages you are talking about.

 

Another way training should be changed imo is by reducing the effectiveness of sparring between two fighters with a great difference in skill. I greatly doubt that in reality a useless boxer gets more out of sparring with an elite boxer than he does by sparring with proficient boxer. I would say he even gets less out of that.

[Guest]

Lastly, this will increase the speed of training for a large majority of the population - something which I think Mike has stated he is not in favor of.

Quite true which kills the entire idea and slowing it down is equally bad. Making 1-1 useless is quite ridiculous. This is quite useful and sought after even in bigger Elite gyms. Taking that away for everyone because of private gyms is just absurd. Furthermore, there is no reason that people who have achieved such success should not be allowed to do so.

 

In conclusion all those that can not fund a private gym with their 2nd company can get the same quality training than those that have a 2nd company

This suggests someone without a 2nd company cannot get private training and that's just absurd.

 

[santa]

this suggests nothing of that sort. It wasn't an absolute statement, it was a statement that was clearly based on 2 singular facts.

[santa]

double post.

 

 

but to help you out, read it in a less aggressive state of mind, and analyse the statement and the conclusion like a mathematical or logical equation that represent 2 statements that have some link.

 

You can change it the other way around, which makes more sense to me. Making training for 1o1 and 2o1 just as effective as now 3o1. Would still have the same effect without the disadvantages you are talking about.

 

Another way training should be changed imo is by reducing the effectiveness of sparring between two fighters with a great difference in skill. I greatly doubt that in reality a useless boxer gets more out of sparring with an elite boxer than he does by sparring with proficient boxer. I would say he even gets less out of that.

 

I thought we were talking here about unfairness. Realism is an entire other field we should not get involved here, or we are going to lose ourselves in endless discussions.

 

That is the reason why I limited my statement before to one specific situation that is unfair. All the other situations can be created by everyone ingame and can be considered as fair. Invictus just missunderstood and took that limitation for a generalisation to everything.

[Guest]

Unless you just became the world's first mutant telepath, please don't tell me what my state of mind is.

 

People can fund a private gym without 2 companies just fine.

[backelie]

1) slowing it down is equally bad.

2) Making 1-1 useless is quite ridiculous.

3) Furthermore, there is no reason that people who have achieved such success should not be allowed to do so.

 

1) Why?

2) Why?

3) This is something we might just have to 'agree to disagree' on. Some of us feel that while success should bring advantages, that those advantages should be made smaller than they are today for the good of the game. My personal guess is that if 1on1 training today was no more effective than 3on1 and some were clamoring to increase it, most would say it's already good enough.

[Guest]

"Good of the game", really? http://www.mmatycoon.com/gympublic.php?gmid=644

 

Not every fighter is a super learning beast at 22 that learns faster than someone's 18 year old. 1-1s are rare, but do exist sparingly in large gyms. Such sessions are quite vital for slower learners. Slowing down training and slowing down 1-1s at this stage of the game would give everyone created after the biggest handicap possible and hurt the slower fighters even further. The talented, fast learning fighters around now would truly become what many believed Sol would be, leaving a gap between us and new players that could never be overcome, ESPECIALLY in regards to project fighters.

 

Additionally, there is no reason that well-run, low session gyms should be punished for what someone else's gym with too many members can't and putting 3-1 at the level of 1-1 would be doing just that.

[Guest]

"Good of the game", really? http://www.mmatycoon.com/gympublic.php?gmid=644

 

Not every fighter is a super learning beast at 22 that learns faster than someone's 18 year old. 1-1s are rare, but do exist sparingly in large gyms. Such sessions are quite vital for slower learners. Slowing down training and slowing down 1-1s at this stage of the game would give everyone created after the biggest handicap possible and hurt the slower fighters even further. The talented, fast learning fighters around now would truly become what many believed Sol would be, leaving a gap between us and new players that could never be overcome, ESPECIALLY in regards to project fighters.

 

Additionally, there is no reason that well-run, low session gyms should be punished for what someone else's gym with too many members can't and putting 3-1 at the level of 1-1 would be doing just that.

 

1-1 are rare now, but the more money people make the more you will see of them. Also the learning rate (in my opinion, but it is shared) is too fast as it is. This means in a normal elite level gym of 3 or 4 per session its still fast. That means that 1-1 is waaaay too fast.

 

All making 3-1 and 1-1 the same will do is remove the need for people to fund their gyms in ways most people cant (yet). This makes 1-1 useless because there is no point in doing it... which is a side affect I personally can agree with if it helps slow down skill gain (which imho is too fast anyway). This should be added not because of realism, but because it makes the game more balanced in the long term.

 

The issue with runaway project fighters was put down last time during the 'sparring every session changes' by saying "well they are older so will eventually be out of the system" I dont agree per say, but if it was good enough last time its good enough now. Secondly our project fighters are running away anyway, nothings going to change that the way we are going. The fact we have fighters who are 3 months old with over 300 points in primaries alone shows that. Given another 12 months anyone but the most highly learned guys will ever catch them (who in real life is elite/elite/elite/elite?)

 

Also this route almost forces people who want to compete at the top to have a gym, or a VIP friend with a gym set up for this purpose alone. Do we really want to see 75% of businesses being these 1-1 Gyms? Worse do we want to see about 50% of fighters just being sparring dummies? These are all long term consequences that could be realised.

 

ps As an aside, just because backelie is using this method doesnt mean he has to agree with it, or cant speak out about it. In fact the very fact he has used it and thinks it is dangerously overpowered means he is speaking from experience and probably should be listened to.

[backelie]

"Good of the game", really? http://www.mmatycoon.com/gympublic.php?gmid=644

I will run an "abusive" gym if the opportunity is there and I feel I 'have to' to keep up with other top managers/fighters.

(Before I switched to clinch coaches recently I was running it profitably with ~2on1 single elites financed by heavy sparring.)

 

Additionally, there is no reason that well-run, low session gyms should be punished for what someone else's gym with too many members can't and putting 3-1 at the level of 1-1 would be doing just that.

I can understand this objection, but I feel 1) 3on1 is fast enough anyway 2) It's better for the game that the "abusive" gyms are stopped even if it also 'punishes' a few legit ones, not much of a punishment as they'd still be among the very best, just not one more step ahead.

 

Not every fighter is a super learning beast at 22 that learns faster than someone's 18 year old. 1-1s are rare, but do exist sparingly in large gyms. Such sessions are quite vital for slower learners.

For every slow learner that manages to snag a 1on1 today there is a faster learner that does the same. Slow learners are always gonna fall behind the curve.

 

Slowing down training and slowing down 1-1s at this stage of the game would give everyone created after the biggest handicap possible and hurt the slower fighters even further. The talented, fast learning fighters around now would truly become what many believed Sol would be, leaving a gap between us and new players that could never be overcome, ESPECIALLY in regards to project fighters.

The same objection was raised about the sparring nerf, that it shouldn't be done because then no one would ever be able to catch up to the early sparring monsters. If the problem is that some are learning too fast (and by using abusive/near-abusive means) then it's a lesser evil to change it ASAP, so that as few fighters as possible get this advantage, than to let the problem go on forever.

 

 

 

edit: Another option that takes less thinking/coding is to put in a catch-all sportsmanship clause, then send a warning to any gym that is considered "too good" and simply ask them to stop, if they refuse then nominate them for being closed down and have Mike pull the trigger if he agrees, but it would take a panel of reasonably fair in-game mods (which might be really hard to come by) to do the scouting/policing, or it would be way too much of a hassle for Mike.

[santa]

Unless you just became the world's first mutant telepath, please don't tell me what my state of mind is.

 

People can fund a private gym without 2 companies just fine.

Nobody has to be a telepath to see that you are going trough this posts with a mindset to find every single mistake and jump on it. It is natural aggressiveness in the clash of different opinions. I was in enough podium debates to know how it works, and it works better when you have a debatte going on, and not a written piece. It is pretty obvious what you do, because one can see your mistakes.

 

Because obviously you thought you had find a statement of mine that you could nail as a mistake and you jumped ahead 2 steps at once. You attacked before you even fully understood the one simple statement and conclusion I made.

Where in the hell did I say you needed 2 companies to fund a private gym OMG....

so tune back the search for the mistakes, and tune up the effort to try and understand what others a writing without jumping to conclusions they never made. Because all I said is that I have a problem with gyms funded by a secondairy company. Now nowhere did I mention anything about the private gyms that arent funded by a secondairy company. Now you jumped to the conclusion that by not mentioning them, I would think they could not exist, and ..... you are so wrong.

 

 

(that was me on an passive aggressive mode showing you the mistakes you made and trying at the same time to attack your general ability to discuss and draw logical conclusions from the facts you have, thus undermining your credibility )

[Guest]

If you want to prevent a big gap between new fighters and older fighters slowing down learning is exactly what you have to do. I doesn't take a genius to figure that out, yet you somehow are able to argue the opposite.

[LeviAJones]

"Good of the game", really? http://www.mmatycoon.com/gympublic.php?gmid=644

 

[Guest]

 

Not really.

[Guest]

Yeah, I also have a private gym but I would love to give it up to change the rules in a way that would improve the game. I agree on almost everything Backelie says here. There might be short term side effects giving older fighters an advantage, but that doesn't matter if it improves the game a large deal after.

[Guest]

I will run an "abusive" gym...and I feel I 'have to' to keep up with other... evil to...let the problem go on forever.

 

 

I agree on...everything Backelie says here.

 

:shame:

[Guest]

How about adding some sort of credit history into the manager stats. Defaulting on a 50k loan would make it much harder to start a new business in the real world.

 

Edit: haha, somehow I didn't see any of the pages past the 2nd ~ what an auspicious first post for these forums.