Guest Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 I voted no, I like that the game rewards patience and I think the pacing we have now is perfect, possibly too fast. A fighter training well and taking on fights can peak at about 25/26, which is well ahead of schedule compared to real life fighters who tend to hit their best around 30-32 (depending on injuries). I voted no too. What's the point. If it was real life you have to train to get results. You can't speed up learning so the same should apply here. I'm tired of hearing sob story if we do this the new people will stay around longer. You are either made to last ot made to fall. You choose. What's next. Give everyone beast fighters so they can stick around longer or allow everyone to create more then one account. Hell just give us all millions of tycoon money so we can all own prv gyms and buyed triple elite coaches. Be done woth this bs already. If you can't succeed with new changes then its time for you to hang it up and move on to something else like fishing where you sit in a boat put some bait on it and cast it in the water and wait for some fish to take the bait.. I guess it would be good to speed that up too so Impatience fishermen caught fish quick. everything these day need to be speed up. Not 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 17, 2013 Report Share Posted July 17, 2013 .....would give more instant gratification to players. This is the key phrase, what I enjoy about this game is that it isn't Call of Duty, it's a game that requires strategy and persistence over a longer time frame. I would hate the game to be changed out of recognition to appease those who want immediate results, we should remember that about a year ago Mike already reduced the length of an in-game year, shortening the fighters' careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpizzEnergi Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I picked up a free guy a while back and he was 2.2... the lowest I've personally had since I worked out how to get a figure is 4.9 so I can only assume that something has been changed in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I would vote yes. The main reason why is I had a whole generation of fighters who were above my 6.0 learning speed cut line and they took until about 25 (from 18) to get a well-rounded arsenal (which is pretty important under this engine). I wouldn't have too much a problem w/ 25 yrs old being the age that guys become "elite" but the only problem I have is that some of these guys are declining as soon as 28. Spending all that time to get a quality fighter just to turn around & have him going downhill after a couple months is a bit annoying to me. But I really have no interest in the climb up the ladder either, I really only play to fight in those elite orgs so....I am sure most guys probably get enjoyment out of the training process and the ID Org fights on the way up. To me that is just a necessary evil to build skills and hype to prepare myself for the only fights that really matter to me. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I'm fine with learning speed how it is,only thing I would want different is for 25yo s to start wit a few more points 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threat Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I'm fine with learning speed how it is,only thing I would want different is for 25yo s to start wit a few more points Me too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aylib Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 No, if anything-decrease. I know this won't be popular, but there are way too many perfect fighters out there. Maybe it would be beneficial to let fighters remain at peak for a bit longer before regressing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 No, if anything-decrease. I know this won't be popular, but there are way too many perfect fighters out there. Maybe it would be beneficial to let fighters remain at peak for a bit longer before regressing. See I'd rather we do it the opposite way. Instead of 2 yrs to get an elite fighter (which is what it too my recent generation to reach elite level) and then 2-3 yrs where you can stay at that elite level. I'd rather just speed up the climb and the fall. One of the big problems that I've always had w/ this game is I don't believe it promotes roster turnover really. I can remember a lot of guys like Gable who the 2nd their guys like Boba Fett ran their course they were pretty much done w/ the game because after fighting at the elite level they didn't wanna have to do a roster reset for the most part. That kinda thinking has always been around in this game, it was the reason every1 blew their damn lids when Mike put in the 1st set of tickers! Everybody was afraid their 35 YO fighters who were elite across were going to get killed by that system and every1 was so reluctant to let guys like that go by the wayside. The MAIN reason for that is because it's such a long process to get back up to that level, so guys hold on to their older fighters for dear life. & once the time comes to finally let go of them they usually look to the Free Agent market before they try to build new. I'd like to see guys get to the top by maybe 22-23 and then make the decline hit harder once you reach 30'ish. Let them climb fast, have a reasonable amount of time at the elite level & then have them fall fast. I think that would encourage guys turning over their rosters a lot more then the way it currently is. I'd like to see Learning Speed at least boosted back up to where it was prior to Mike putting in tickers. I think that's where the mistake was made, Mike implemented tickers to start to bring skills back in line a little bit BUT also decreased learning speed because of tickers. Then after every1 cried their eyes out about tickers he nerfed them and made them pretty much useless but kept the learning speed where it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caleb613 Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 See I'd rather we do it the opposite way. Instead of 2 yrs to get an elite fighter (which is what it too my recent generation to reach elite level) and then 2-3 yrs where you can stay at that elite level. I'd rather just speed up the climb and the fall. One of the big problems that I've always had w/ this game is I don't believe it promotes roster turnover really. I can remember a lot of guys like Gable who the 2nd their guys like Boba Fett ran their course they were pretty much done w/ the game because after fighting at the elite level they didn't wanna have to do a roster reset for the most part. That kinda thinking has always been around in this game, it was the reason every1 blew their damn lids when Mike put in the 1st set of tickers! Everybody was afraid their 35 YO fighters who were elite across were going to get killed by that system and every1 was so reluctant to let guys like that go by the wayside. The MAIN reason for that is because it's such a long process to get back up to that level, so guys hold on to their older fighters for dear life. & once the time comes to finally let go of them they usually look to the Free Agent market before they try to build new. I'd like to see guys get to the top by maybe 22-23 and then make the decline hit harder once you reach 30'ish. Let them climb fast, have a reasonable amount of time at the elite level & then have them fall fast. I think that would encourage guys turning over their rosters a lot more then the way it currently is. I'd like to see Learning Speed at least boosted back up to where it was prior to Mike putting in tickers. I think that's where the mistake was made, Mike implemented tickers to start to bring skills back in line a little bit BUT also decreased learning speed because of tickers. Then after every1 cried their eyes out about tickers he nerfed them and made them pretty much useless but kept the learning speed where it was. I agree with this, the game is ever evolving so let's evolve the way it works aswell I believe that it would see more competition at higher levels and more big fights and less of the same guys on top all the time I loved guys like tonal and Kane and bubba and puno but being a big name at 38 and not just one guy (Henderson) leaves no room for competition at the elite level Hence my two favourites in history being golden glory and YB SOl Yb because OG, huge climb and huge fall Glory because he hit p4p number one so young Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aylib Posted August 15, 2014 Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 I am just fine with having top fighters on my roster and adding new ones at all times by sacking some mid-level guys. No problem turning the roster over at all.I dont think learning speed has anything to do with how I maintain my roster. I'd keep the same mix regardless; I like having top guys, obviously, but to replace them I try to develop my own projects, and once mid level fighters start to falter, they get replaced, and so I have top fighters, mid level prospects, and beginners at all times. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haplo Posted August 16, 2014 Report Share Posted August 16, 2014 I don't think that it needs to be sped up. I might find it interesting if having a fight gave a temporary (4wk or less boost to training) and/or ring rust was simulated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warlord Posted August 16, 2014 Report Share Posted August 16, 2014 I just realized i liked the game speed the way it is right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 I just realized i liked the game speed the way it is right now. I've always liked it,slow learners included (even though I sack them) but as I said,I think 25yo build fighters need more start points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 I have a fairly brand new 22 year old with almost the exact same skill total as Jon Hess so I think learning is okay with great hiddens but a higher turnover would probably be better in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted August 17, 2014 Report Share Posted August 17, 2014 I would say no, it will give the newer fighters an advantage and it will also mean that they peak faster as well, so the lower orgs lose out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.