Posted by l80r20 on 1/13/2018 10:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 1/13/2018 2:18:00 PM (view original):
Does anyone else find this statement a weird way to phrase something

" but only for that cycle and onward."

Your point?

His point was probably that it's a weird way to phrase it.

Shot in the dark.

Posted by mullycj on 1/13/2018 1:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 1/13/2018 1:56:00 AM (view original):
Breaking news—

“Promising minutes is only a multiplier if the player has a preference of "Wants to Play". Otherwise, you just get the one-time credit of the promise.”-
site staff in an answer to another question

This is a 180 from what was a known fact in the forums that promises were a multiplier for anything no matter if there was a want to play or not. Because of the 100% consensus in the forums I don’t know if I quite believe the guy.

The CS response is always what Ive been told and seen

I agree. It has always been something that only acts as a multiplier if there is a "wants to play" preference.

For what it’s worth, CS seems to be going out of its way to not answer a direct question about promises themselves affecting the value of visits. I’ll post the whole chain if I ever get a straight answer.

I am a little disappointed with CS right now. I got all excited when they answered all my open tickets this summer but I have had a question to them for a week with no response.

They have answered this whole deal pretty quickly, all weighing a day or so.

Ok, I’m satisfied that the original CS response to buddha was an unfortunate mistake.

It appears there are now conflicting responses from CS regarding whether promises affect the value of visits for players without a preference to playing time. See this thread - https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=506533 Y Can you please clarify? Is there any benefit at all in promising a start and/or minutes to a player prior to conducting visits if the player has no playing time preference?
1/13/2018 6:43 PM	Customer Support
The only extra impact from a minutes promise is that if the player has a "Wants to play" preference, the promise will flip that preference into a positive one. Then it has a similar impact as other preferences.
1/13/2018 7:15 PM	shoe3
And there is no multiplier effect on promised starts for visits to a player with no playing time preference? Just the stand alone one time value? So promising a start as a last resort for a player with no playing time preference has the same effect as promising the start up front, before visits? Or are you purposely specifying minutes here because you’d rather not get specific on the starts? Just making sure we’re not spreading misinformation based on a previously mistaken CS response to new users.
1/14/2018 5:39 PM	Customer Support
No, promising starts does not impact the preference at all.
1/14/2018 9:33 PM	shoe3
I understand that, the question is whether the start affects the value of visits?
1/15/2018 10:39 AM	Customer Support
As mentioned earlier, the only boost is related to flipping the "Wants to Play" preference to Good or Very Good. That only happens by promising minutes. So, outside of that, there is no other boost related to promises. 1/15/2018 11:54 AM shoe3 Ok one more clarification, because one way or another, a mistaken CS response has led to misinformation being spread, and I’m intent on avoiding that. Going back to the original, apparently mistaken CS response to a scenario presented in the thread I posted, when a player has no preference for playing time, a team that offers a start before doing visits is getting no additional value than they would get by promising a start at the very end of recruiting as a last resort. Is that right? Simple yes or no, and I’ll stop bugging you, thanks! 1/15/2018 11:54 AM shoe3 1/15/2018 12:19 PM Customer Support That's correct.

Boo, minutes being a multiplier was such a better system!

All those guys I promised minutes to for nothing.

I still have a problem with this CS response. Not only is this not the manner I recall seble explaining the system during the beta process, but it also seems to run counterintuitive to the process things seem to go through when changing minutes promises..

Consider -- if CS is correct, the whole deal of upgrading a minutes promise from 15 to 20 wouldn't require any complex sequence of undoing and redoing. Just add the extra boost for the 5 extra minutes, done. Also, there'd be no need to add a penalty for canceling stuff out because it would be a simple product of dropping the credit from that action, etc.

Of course, seble could answer this really easily, but since he hasn't shown on the forums since the game was bought, I have as much opportunity to get the answer from the Almighty himself in the Second Coming.