Gah ... How bad are Worcester???

[Gorduz]

Ive been playing Cricket Captain for many many years, since the early days of playstation 2, So Im experienced in the highs and lows (very lows) this game offers. I understand why Worcestershire start off the game poorly, because quite frankly they are. However in editions gone by over several seasons you can improve upon a county team to make it your own and eventually have a decent team. However, this is the first time for me...Im struggling big time. Ive got the players that have decent averages for both bowling and batting, yet they are severly under performing, Ive tried to play with an attacking approach, and dare I say it defensive too, Ive trained youth players and signed some great ones...according to the stats. I was just wondering if... dare I say it... no matter what you do, some county teams just rate badly no matter what you do in this new version... Thanks for reading this thread and let me know your findings...signing off; a very discruntled and for the first time in several years, a disappointed loyal purchaser of this game.

[Themer]

You're disgruntled because you're not winning? The game isn't meant to be easy and if you think Worcestershire are bad you should try a game as South Australia.

[Gorduz]

lol of course i am as I said before I understand the game isnt supposed to be easy, but dont we all play games to win? Thats the whole point, while having fun on the way. One of the reasons to play worcester, to show your loyalty and for the challenege otherwise I would of played one of the more affluent county teams, all I was wondering (as there seems to be a marked difference) is there a factor in the game mechanics from previous versions that means that the poorer rated teams are less likely to win and collapse in their batting and fail to take wickets. If thats the case then I can sleep easier in my bed...moaning completed I think Ill return to recieving another hammering. Signing out... a still disappointed worcester campaigner

[bnd3]

I've managed to turn South Australia into a good side after about 5 seasons. So I think it is possible to create a good team with Worcestershire, it just takes longer than it would with a better county.

[Imager36]

I like the challenge of Derbyshire. They're pretty awful (- Clare), but they have (or did have last year at least) a nice budget so you could mould your own team quite quickly.

[Themer]

All I was wondering (as there seems to be a marked difference) is there a factor in the game mechanics from previous versions that means that the poorer rated teams are less likely to win and collapse in their batting and fail to take wickets. If thats the case then I can sleep easier in my bed...moaning completed I think Ill return to recieving another hammering. Signing out... a still disappointed worcester campaigner

Nah there isn't a rating that's in place to stop any team from becoming good.

[ab5ides1]

I like the challenge of Derbyshire. They're pretty awful (- Clare), but they have (or did have last year at least) a nice budget so you could mould your own team quite quickly.

Madsen and Rodgers are pretty solid openers too. I think in one game this season they fielded something like 3 or 4 actual Englishmen and a lot of South African kolpaks.

[Imager36]

Yeah, I don't like Derbyshire, but I like the challenge

NOTE - I've just counted, and they fielded only 4 English or Welsh born players against Sussex earlier in the season

[Chewie]

Hopefully Callum, Brendon and I don't face the same problems you do in our Worcestershire story over on PlanetCricket haha

And Themer - South Australia aren't that bad, I won the One Day competition with them in the first season! (I did come last in the other two competitions but still!)

[Imager36]

Lovely subtlety there, Chewie

And yeah, South Australia have their good points (I got 320 in a one day match first season and then bowled NSW out for 150 odd, when they had all their Australia players) but keeping it up is a real slog.

[BigCisHere]

Worcester are pretty bad when you start it off

Again, I was going for the loyalty factor by choosing Worcestershire, since that's where I live.

Just bought the game today, and I've had some good wins, and some massive losses (more defeats than wins admittedly). Managed to win 6 of the 20/20 matches, after 8 CC matches, I have won 2 and drawn 6! and in the 40 over competition, I have lost 5 out of 5 :P

Daryl Mitchell is playing very well for me, but the other guys seem very up and down

Hopefully I can turn them into a decent team before long

EDIT: Having said that, I just went and beat Sussex for my first 40 over win of the season

[lancashire r the best]

ye i no wat u mean mate im being loyal to lancashire but they cannot bat i haven't won a game yet. against surrey in 40 over league i got bowled out for 144 thats rubbish however steve croft is a amazing player just like the game is amazing

[enigma]

ye i no wat u mean mate im being loyal to lancashire but they cannot bat i haven't won a game yet. against surrey in 40 over league i got bowled out for 144 thats rubbish however steve croft is a amazing player just like the game is amazing

Lancashire's batting isn't clicking with me either & to make it even worse, Moore, Smith & Flintoff are all injured. Season so far- FC Games- P-4,W-0,L-1,D-3 ; 40-overs- P-5,W-2,L-3

Just tasted only my second success of the season in 40-Overs format against guess who ....... Worcester & they almost put up a fight; was put in to bat & somehow scraped together 187-8 and they looked on track at 89-2(17) with Solanki & Hasan looking ominous but Hogg & Parry ripped through the top & middle with 4 & 2 wickets & managed to bowl them out for 130 (30.4) Lancs batting is REALLY struggling for me, haven't been able get any big scores in FC games to put the other team under pressure but I'm liking the challenge.

By the way, nice to see that Croft is doing well for someone; for me, he's played all 5 FC & 5 40-Overs games & hasn't been able to get even a fifty. Only Sutton doing well for me, averaging 50.37 in FC & 47.50 in 40-Overs format.

[lancashire r the best]

my season so far FC p-5 w-0 d-3 l-2 and in 40 over league i have lost 5 out of 5 cos then cant bat however in my last game i put in a extra batsman(Karl Brown) for gary keedy as the pitch wasnt turning and used croft as number 1 spinner as he isnt that bad and brown got 124 and 51 but all the other batsman failed again and all my bowlers toiled and didnt take regular wickets horton isnt that bad but all the yougsters procter shankar etc are rubbish but it is a challenge and that is fun

[enigma]

my season so far FC p-5 w-0 d-3 l-2 and in 40 over league i have lost 5 out of 5 cos then cant bat however in my last game i put in a extra batsman(Karl Brown) for gary keedy as the pitch wasnt turning and used croft as number 1 spinner as he isnt that bad and brown got 124 and 51 but all the other batsman failed again and all my bowlers toiled and didnt take regular wickets horton isnt that bad but all the yougsters procter shankar etc are rubbish but it is a challenge and that is fun

Brown got those in FC, right? Or was it OD? Did he open? He has only played one game for me, that was the last OD against Worcester that I won, he got 15(28) but I'll try to persist with him to see what he can do but him as well as ALL the other 2nd stringers (except Parry) are performing miserably in the 2nd XI games, like batsmen averaging below 30, bowlers averaging over 30, etc which begs the question as to why ICC didn't let us choose our players from the 1st season itself, that was a nice feature until ICC2006 which has been done away with, at least we would've'd better youngsters to groom in the long run

Horton has constistently gotten starts in FC but hasn't been able to convert into 50s & 100s, very frustrating & has been snail-slow in limited overs, just the other day I lost chasing 218 because he scored 69 off 98 balls while he was on FIVE OR MORE aggression bars throughout his innings. One thing that bothers me with ICC in limited overs games is when you lose a wicket when 5-10 overs are remaining & the new batsman plays out a couple of maidens which is just unrealistic & takes away the realism of the game. ICC needs to have a look into this & may be create a "singles mode" (for limited overs games only) when turned on, batsmen will ONLY look for singles, no big shots possible & may be it should increase the chances of runouts & only really good runners can get singles ever ball or so, etc

By the way, are you utilising the technique coaching? Takes time but can be useful. I got Mahmood to improve on his accuracy through coaching & am trying for a few batsmen to become aggressive style. And where are you playing Sutton at? I've played him at 6-7 in both forms & he's given wonderful results. Where are you playing Croft at? May be I can try him in that position to get him going.

Currently, playing against Warwicks, it's a flat pitch so I'm content with only choking them for runs, they're 127-3(65) after two sessions. I play at a snail's pace, unlike some people here who've raced to 2050 season, etc., to each his own I guess. I don't play a lot but I like to take my time & immerse myself in the game as if my life depends on it Cheers