Mana Games

[Dan]

I'm slightly annoyed right now after being dumped by a player I was coaching (Tatiana Golovin). After picking her up when she was ranked in the 20s, I managed to put her right on the brink of entering the top 10. However, after one season, she suspended the contract because I failed to win a tournament at International Gold or above level.

So my question: is there any way to make these contracts less ridiculous? I think basing them merely on whether you win a certain title level is oversimplifying a bit. In the year that I was coaching her, I made the semifinals at a Grand Slam and the final at a Tier I tournament, which is arguably better than winning a Tier II title, yet absolutely none of that matters at all just because I didn't actually win them?

Thanks in advance for any help!

[Slutiana]

Agreed. I think the contracts should be more results based than achievements as if you're on a training block then you're not losing yet your contract could still be disbanded.

[JenerationJ]

I think the contracts are fair as they are. If a player wants to win Tier II tourneys and above, alter their schedule so that they play as many Tier II tourneys as possible. That way when they win one you can focus on getting their ranking up. I feel like there's only a certain level of realism the moderators and game editors can infuse into the game, but to better suit your request maybe they can add a sub-category to the contracts (i.e. win 1 Tier II tourney AND/OR reach SF of Grand Slam).

However, as they are the contracts add a challenge to the game, kind of like missions and objectives in other types of games.

[Curtis]

I agree with JenerationJ. There are maybe three categories of contract requirements, so I usually choose the players who say they want to reach rank X as a singles (or more often doubles) player. I know from the sponsorship contracts that the 'win X number of Challengers in six months' clauses are real bears, so I stay away from the players with those kinds of demands.