Nov
11
2009
Pay Rises & Their Effect On Morale
A widley used tactic to improve morale is to give players a pay rise. There are two things you should know about tactic:
1. The maximum morale increase a team can get in any one turn through increasing players wages is 1.
2. Every time you opt to increase a player’s wages, the less chance moreale has of rising.
In real terms if morale does not go up after a couple of attempts then it is a worthless excercise trying any more until the next turn.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 11th, 2009 at 8:27 pm and is filed under Games Tips. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
11 Responses to “Pay Rises & Their Effect On Morale”
Leave a Reply:
| Dealing Limits »
I’ve used this tactic everytime my morale has been below 20 & its worked everytime but i think its artificial & should be removed. It also gives MANY poor to mediocre players very high wages which are simply stupid! Maybe something else could be introduced with regards to improving morale? Something like the option to spend cash to take the squad on a team building exercise on a sliding scale or something? Not guaranteed like the player wage increase but if you want to improve squad morale then it has to come with a higher value cos as things stand every team can increase it by increasing the lowest paid players wage, usually around an extra £300 a week on a £3k player! Surely team morale has to be worth more than that?
I concur Stu. Maybe a ‘once a turn’ outing for the whole squad, like a trip to the coast or climbing wall, for a set fee (500k?) which is guaranteed to raise morale by 1, is a more effective option than picking out individual players (often poorer players, as it makes sense to pick the ones on lowest wages) for wage increases.
It may be a false way to do it, but it’s simple and has been like this since morale was invented. I don’t see the point in change for change’s sake and I don’t agree that a morale point should be given a monetary value. It’s easy to keep a wage troll in your side, purelly for morale increases and you can retire him when his wages get too high. I think the point Richard is making is that there is no point giving wage increases willy-nilly to players that are already on high skill points?
Perhaps it’s time to take the ability to put it up one by increasing wages completely and change the levels that morale is affected by results to see some gulfs in morale, which we used to see in the paper game.
Same as Stu really, everytime my morale is below 20 i increase the lowest paid players wage. Can take up to 3 goes but usually works in the end and costs next to nothing.
I do quite like the simplicity of it and am not sure id like to pay money out on getting morale (although it is a good suggestion). I say leave it as it is or just remove it for a morale gulf as that may add some more twists in terms of results which would add interest.
Isn’t giving a payrise to raise morale (or attempt to) putting a monetary value on it then..?
Wow, been playing for 4 or 5 years and never heard of this. Dont think the experienced managers need any more help. Id say it needs overhauled. havent thought of a good alternative yet.
Spen, technically yes but its 1,000 compared to 500,000??
Technically … that’s good enough for me as that’s the point I was raising
So you had a point? :-p
It would take a wee bit of coding, but rather than start penalising for changes, the morale system could be completely overhauled so that the how a team plays each week, on top of the reult of the game, could affect the morale.
A calculation could be made on the effect of squad changes with a built in random factor, so changes could have a positive or negative effect on how the team played. This isn’t a figure we would ever see, although it would possibly have either a positive or negative effect on the players ratings. The reason for this first step is that some new signings have a positive effect on a team and some a negative effect.
The second stage is a calculation using the starting eleven’s ratings.
I would suggest a 5 rating counts as -2 morale, as 6 rating could be -1 morale and a 9 rating + 2 morale. and a 10 rating +3 morale.
Taking the Premier results last week:
Winchmore v Bambino 4-4 Winchmore 0 mc Bambino +4 mc
Olympic v Druids 2-1 Olympic +3mc Druids +1mc
ELA v Veleno 3-2 ELA +1 Veleno -1mc
Celtic Hearts v Prophets 1-1 Hearts +4 Prophets +1mc
scv v Warmington 4-3 SVC +2mc Warmington -2mc
Tormenta v Star 2-1 Tormenta +1mc Star -2mc
These resultswork out well and with the intial calculation built in, could really make morale – and a player’s ratings, mean more than if he gets a 9 rating he has a chance to go up with a run of 9s.
What do you think?
Having been away from the game for some time and seeing that morale is a current discussion point , for me, it is useful to know just how much morale plays a part in the game i.e. How much should it concern us?
Because there are many factors influencing a result, such as aggression, skill points, morale, fitness, chance, player form, home advantage, formation, and all of the same factors for the opposition team, it is difficult to know what to suggest in terms of tweaking morale i.e. not knowing where it ranks in the list of factors influencing a game’s outcome.
As I sit here picking my team, I wonder what factors are the most important to consider (after skill points) because I do know that with so many factor’s of my team and the opponents team to consider, if I change anything after a bad result, how will the deliberate change I make affect the next result, positively or negatively – since I do not know how much potential impact my change had in relation to the other factors that may or may not remain constant.
Lets say I play 4-3-3 against a team of equal skill playing 4-3-3 – no difference there. Let’s say that my fitness is also the same i.e. all 10s.
I have home advantage so there is the first difference. My players are on form a little more than their players (no idea if this makes a difference, so will assume it does as hopefully my lot will perform better). On this occasion, morale should play a significant part if it differs greatly. But as most games are either drawn or won by a single goal, how much can morale really affect the outcome, especially as typically, teams will line up with different formations and skill points?
I would suggest no changing how morale is affected unless we can know how much influence it has on the outcome of a game.