Recent Posts
18,542 posts(s) found
BK,
I don’t completely agree with you about it never being a problem in ManagerSim, but let’s move on so we don’t miss the point of this discussion.
I agree with you that “To FIX the wrong logic all you need is correcting the formulas, code and so on”. The big question is: does the developers intend to spend the time that this “formulas and code corrections” demand? We haven’t listen Gabriel or Danilo’s opinion on this topic so far…
Considering that they probably won’t have the time availability to work on this properly, I can see two simple suggestions:
1) Remove all this CPU-only countries, whose only purpose in the current game engine is to buy some decent players or good prospects and never selling them again until the end of their careers (simply removing them from the market..).
2) Reset the CPU behavior to the one that used to be in place before the change that messed with the game’s economy and market. Ok, I know that it wasn’t a perfect game them, but certainly it was funnier than it is right now. Back them it was possible to build a competitive team from zero, as I did with Bristol after 10 seasons, and as others managed to make in much less time (e.g. Dhimiter’s Cardiff). The way it is now, it is almost impossible to attract new players, and almost certain that we will keep loosing traditional good managers such as Dhimiter, Phillip, Ulisses, among others….
Yes, that seems to be a good strat right now.
Hello Paulo
Thanks for replying.
I looked at your team and became interested in the player Mariano Álvarez. I think maybe he can improve his skills a little more, no?
I’d be willing to borrow this player from you for this season. I can pay 100% wage.
Cheers
Paulo, that was never a problem in ManagerSim, having too many computer managed clubs. Some countries were locked from getting human managers but still the mechanics behind the economy were better.
When reading your and Filipe’s comments I get the feeling of “Catch-22” over that kind of suggestions/logic, because in order to get more managers you need to have a “better game” and in order to make the game better you need to get more managers.
Make no mistake, if you have a great game, people will hear about it and get there. Of course you can aid by marketing, sometimes quite costly thing but on the other hand when the product is great, people will tell others about it.
To FIX the wrong logic all you need is correcting the formulas, code and so on, with or without more managers you need to handle the logic behind. Now the situation is perfect to learn from. We now know what to expect when there are not so many managers and many (80%+) CPU teams, ie how the economy works. What we can do is learn and adapt. When the scenario is reversed, and most of the clubs are managed by real managers then I am sure we’ll have other problems and the world will not be as perfect as you mean. Then we need to adapt again. It’s a learning and adapting process. Get that.
BK
Or how to make money in the game without caring to count potential ability, possible number of skill points being “unlocked” per season when developing players for sale, playing your players x number of games etc..
This story has a background, so here it is.
It was almost 10 years ago, I met this guy, let’s call him John. He was a successful businessman turned into Business Angel, after working his business up and selling it for quite many millions (in dollars). It was amazing how much ways there are in making money, I knew that but never expected to hear this.
What he did was buying flowers, tons of them, while they were quite small, not full-grown that is, cultivated them until they reached a certain size and then sold to the next guy in the chain, so the flower cultivating process from seed to product in a florist shop was x number of instances of cultivating from size A to size B to size C and so on. The best part of this was the process for John took a lot less time and was less risky if he was to do all by himself, that is from seed to flower-in-the-shop. So all the people involved in this process made money and they shared the risk between themselves. They made less money by getting paid for cultivating just a certain time. A cycle could be few weeks to 2 months but they got paid.
Same logic applied in RubySoccer:
Last season I just gathered few players on free transfer, cost me only their (low) wages for a season. Then I sold them this season. With the current transfer market mechanics, I got around 65M for 8 or so players. Now I could keep them for several more seasons and maybe make 50M of just one player but why bother?
So follow John and follow the money advice if you want to make 50-100M every season, at least until the transfer market mechanics are changed. Unless you are too greedy of course. ;)
BK
Take a look at those two players of mine:
Tyrone Haworth
Dean Waite
If you are interested, I may loan out one of them…
Let me add my two cents to the discussion.
First of all, I must say that I agree with most of what has been said by BK and Charles. But, mainly with Filipe. More human players is the only solution – and probably the only objective for this game. I am quite sure that if anyone wants to play against a lot of computers, there are lots of better offline options out there.
However, bringing more human managers to the game is not an easy task – which gets even harder as it seems already difficult to keep the current managers interested in the game.
So, if you can’t make the number of human managers increase in absolute value, maybe increasing the relative number of human managers is an easier task. Personally I believe that the game has just too many countries, leagues and teams for too few managers. It would be much nicer to have only two or three leagues full of human players than having this huge amount of teams managed by CPU. If the same 147 managers that are currently active in fast ticker were playing among only 160 or 200 teams, I am sure that we would have a much more interesting market and consequently much more fun…
The way it is now (84% of the team are managed by CPU), the market rely almost completely in CPU behavior and AI. I have never programmed in my life, but I believe that developing a good AI is something quite difficult and which demands an amount of time that probably Gabriel and Danilo do not have right now. If they could just forget that for a while, considering that in an ideal world computer decisions would be responsible for a minimal movement of the market, they would be able to spend the little time that they have available in other important things, such as the game engine.
Unfortunately, right now the developers seem to have too little time to dedicate to the game and IMHO they are wasting their efforts in the wrong issues (if I am not mistaken the last “improvements” of the game were related to the creation of more and more teams to be managed by CPU and proportional performance for human managers – not really the critical issues for the future of the game…).
After 5 years there should be no restriction, its enouf time to build a team and be able to spend all the money in one player if you really want him…
Anyway, I’m not asking to change the restriction formula we have now, I just think there should be a minimum for this restrictions, doesn’t really matter if a manager want to spend 5M in a 2M value player…
ya, it definitely looks like interest is waning for this game… its a shame really, but without anyone working full time on it, it’s tough to get any traction on implementing new ideas and such.
I would also be willing to borrow a younger player like this for this season.
By the way, I’m referring to the fast tick dimension.
Check out the team Mallorca in Spanish 2nd division. Then go to the previous years matches, and check the last couple of league games from the previous season. The match reports indicate a team with no keeper? And they were winning every game too!
Maybe a transfer budget depending on the number of the years you spent in the club?
so 10% to 50% depending on how long your loyalty has been tested, something like:
1 year 10% of funds
2 year 15% of funds
3 year 20% of funds
4 year 30% of funds
5 year 40% of funds
5+ years = the maximum of 50% of the funds.
This would make it harder for cheaters to roam around and get teams with money and spend it all between themselves.
/BK
Hi, I’ve been looking for a reasonably good MR for my team. I’m willing to spend up to 15M (my team is kinda poor!). If you have a player with some skills around 85 and above, and are willing to sell him, let me know.
Cheers
Thank you! I got it.
Had missed that option!
Cheers
Hi,
In the settings of the game.
there is a place where you can tic (Schedule friendlies on season start?)
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/manager_settings
At the begining of each new season the pc, will give you some computeur friendies.
So it will only work next year for you.
Charles, I am not talking about hiding the player value, player value can still exist but it would be calculated differently, also all the extra money have to be removed to, I am guessing but I think there are many clubs with more than couple of hundred millions, it’s very strange thing.
About managers leaving the game, I can not speak for Danilo and Gabriel but if it was my game and if I had to make a decision about quitting now or in a year, I’d say now, as there is no point of prolonging the “pain”.
A new dimension to implement things maybe is the answer but it all depends on where the game is going. There are far more worse games out there who charge you for money in some way, so manager leaving or coming is a marketing thing really. You can not keep making implementations to keep managers happy. At the same time, since I’ve been in in their (the developers) place I know it’s not easy to say no as the game grows it becomes “everyone” somehow. Still someone makes the decisions about what to be done or not.
Some say the managers would quit if the game is reset, and I could say that some will quit if the current situation continues but what do I know, right?
Just look at how many views this thread has and how many people wrote here, it is really sad to see.
/BK
you are correct, thats why i think perhaps creating a 3rd world would help. But again, it all depends on what admins have in mind for the game…
I think that if the game is reset, you will probably end up seeing less human players. I imagine many people would be very frustrated about that and just quit. Many seasons building up their teams, and suddenly they have no team anymore..
No, default is always the default formation for every game. If you want to use another formation for a game, you have to select that one.
If you have several invitations, you can use the ‘accept all’ feature (and select ‘friendly1’ for all).
I don’t think removing the player value will have much effect until we see more human managers. Even if you remove player value, the CPU will still know the players hidden value (assuming you just “hide” the player value not removing it) so the CPU teams will continue spending the money they are currently spending. In the end, the market is inflated, but unfortunately, unless you reset the game world there isn’t much to be done with it. Changes have been made over the years which still might be affecting the games current economy, however, unless we reset the game worlds, or create a 3rd world so we can start testing and implementing new features, it’ll be tough to see the exact results…
as i said before, the game is still enjoyable, but further tweaking is needed to advance the game. Suggestions already posted here such as adding more clauses to contracts and such can definitely help make the game more dynamic.
I play on the fast tick, and a new season has just started. I’ve noticed many human teams managed to schedule friendly matches against a CPU team starting on turn 1. How do I do that? So far I could only find how to invite other humans for friendlies. The way I do is I click on the list of online players and invite the one I want.
Thanks for the help.
yes you are new, let’s see if you are as happy as now in a few more seasons. :)
The task of implementing better logics for the cpu teams should not be really that hard, as the cpu teams “know” who the potential great players are and then they could make bids on those players first before trying to buy the 34 old guys.
/BK
In my settings I set my friendly formation as ‘friendly1’ which is the name of my reserve formation, which I always use for friendlies. So I though it would automatically set my formation to this one whenever I accepted (or created) an invitation for a friendly.
However, what has been happening is that if I accept a friendly invitation without setting a particular formation, the AI will set my default formation, which is the main team. I wonder if I’m doing something wrong.
Listen, I’m new here, but I think people are being really pessimistic here. The game looks fine to me! In many aspects it is very realistic actually. For instance, the slow development of players. Starting at 16 and reaching their peak at around 25 is really good. Then dropping after 31.. I think that feature is very good!
I understand many people are questioning the transfer market. The economics of the game can get complicated indeed, but I couldn’t comment much without knowing how much money in the bank the CPU teams have at the moment. One thing that seems wrong to me is that CPU teams appear to be spending too much money buying old players. They can pay high prices for 34yo players, which doesn’t look right. But I imagine it must be quite hard to program the CPU teams to actually play the game as a human. We can’t really demand perfect AI. I think the fact that the game has been going on for so many seasons without huge problems is quite an accomplishment.
Yepp, when developing a game you have to ignore some of the “advice” and take some or simply do some trial and error, and most importantly learn what works and what not.
That’s why I mean if we (others than the developers) really want to help developing the best game after SoccerSim leaving a void in that category, we need to find out what works and what not. That’s why we do not need to pay attention to who moans about result and transfers by cpu teams but adapt and change code, test and change, test and change some more.
In real world you have a development team and you have the test team, they both work by the requirements someone made.
Never can a testing team make change requests. You need to set a requirement team to make sure you do not have insane requirements, developers sticking to that requirements and then testers testing if the implementations mirror the required features.
Why is THIS different here? Reset the game already..
BK
I’m now facing the money restrictions from the board and I find it very strange they wont allow me to buy good potential players for very small amounts, older players with great potential are very sub evaluated so the board wont let me spend 6M in a player when they now have more than 120M…
There should be a minimum limit for this restrictions, something like 7-10% the bank account… The way it is now its to much hard for new and poor managers…
The CPU crazy buyers was a mistake, it was easy to see this would happen and I believe the only reason this was done was because the pressure some managers putted on the developers, bad managers that continue to perform badly… In the end money worth less, you can’t find as good players in the transfer market, its harder to build a new team unless you can be online every 3 turns (because CPU are).
As I said before the only real solution for the game’s health is having more human managers playing, all the investment in the game should be for that purpose…
Cheers
Dimitri, we can have a chat/voice session and discuss, but it’s really alarming that there is not much more voices in here throwing theories and opinions.
To answer you quickly, all cpu team’s actions should be scripted and pre-calculated. “They” have an advantage over us, knowing the potential of a player and, if the transfer amounts are around 80M for a great player and they can afford it, and know that guy will become a greater and more valuable for the team than a 8M player, then they can go for him, else try to meet the requirements from the board, such as, stay in the division, title challenge, etc. On the other hand they could offer only what they think player is supposed to be worth, and that kind of levels can be added to a table in the database saying:
player with average 85 is 10-15M worth of value, 90 average is 15-25M, 95 is 25-40M, depending on:
- number of games at the highest level (country (where the player played) ranking in effect here)
- number of national games
- age (actually how many more productive years normally left, if player is not forced to quit/retire)
- stardom, like in Soccersim, silver stars and gold stars added value to player, added effect to merchandise
now, the money in the clubs have to be balanced and the formulas for generating money/costs have to be really closely monitored.
Now, if we had many human managers you wouldn’t need to script the actions of the CPU teams, the actions/transactions/fun would happen anyway. We have many cpu teams and we need to balance things or not at all, depends on what kind of game you want.
I guess there is not a quick and easy answer Dimitri.
/BK
Ok, let’s suppose we remove player value. A cpu team needs a MR. There is one on the market for 80M. Should the cpu team buy the player?