Recent Posts
18,555 posts(s) found
If the paper was simple like in SoccerSim i would read it everyday. It told of signings within the league and had interviews with managers. Ok the questions were the same all the time but that didnt matter, It was nice reading managers opinions on the teams around them etc.
1. Economy needs sorted.
2. Add contract clauses (Big club, relegation) Some players never signed unless they had Big club clause, made things more fun.
3. Change countries back so that were your based brought in smaller income etc. England, Spain, Germany etc should all be making more money than in Colombia.
Personnaly I do not read the newspaper…
mrebello, agreed.
Berhan, I was not talking about an app. It would be just a simplified mobile interface, with just the most used functionalities. For example, at the moment we know the 3 areas people use most are:
1. the mail
2. the formation
3. negotiations
So if we develop something to give the users a good coverage on those 3 things, it should be enough.
I am not saying we will not have more in future, though… Who knows?
IMO, the newspaper should be either fixed or removed entirely from the game.
I would say 3(?) major areas the game needs to be improved on:
1. Economy, this is DO or DIE, as simple as that. DO some research and find out what needs to be done! You really need to contain the economy in a sand-box kind of way so you do not get maybe more than 5% increase or decrease in economy trends/season. I have ideas more specific on HOW this could work.
2. Player/Manager/Club interaction, this is the bread and butter in every manager game:
– Fail here and you’ll have a mediocre game. Do a brilliant job here and you’ll see people(managers) joining the game.
3. An app is a good thing but you do not have the masses in a community. An app would add good for the existing manages but I doubt it will bring much more new faces as long as you do not have strong economy models and player/manager/club interaction. Just having an app wouldn’t make it a famous game. I like the idea of having an app, do not get me wrong. At the moment I am testing one called OFM (Online Football Manager). It is well designed, a similar thing would be ideal for RubySoccer. But if you look closer at the app you’ll see there is more under the hood.
If you are going to INVEST in an APP, you need to have a very specific strategy on what you need to achieve with that app. Think 100k or more users. If you start investing time (which you do not have) on an app (a completely different project) it will be a matter of time before you lose interest in the game and abandoning it. I think there is something to learn from the ManagerSim guys. So my "vote for nr.3 is NOTHING, first 2 are more important than anything else.
BK
Maybe that could be implemented by some players not wanting to renew their contract. The renewal decision would also be based on the happiness of the player in the team (if the player is not happy, he would leave at the end of the contract, no matter the wage offered)
oh i agree with the change in CPU spending tactics, it would be great if both could be done.
“This would then force managers to sell players at a more realistic price”
Managers are selling for the prices cpu teams are willing to pay. If those prices are not realistic, shouldn’t the cpu teams bidding behaviour be fixed?
OK with The Monty
It would be nice to see players leaving clubs, at the moment you can just keep players on your books the whole time. It would make the game more interesting if players left due to not having enough game time or wanting to move to a different or bigger club or if the team got relegated. This would then force managers to sell players at a more realistic price knowing that the player could leave for nothing if a sale doesn’t go though.
Ok guys, can we be objective here? What do YOU think we should be investing our time in? I would like to see 2-3 bullet points from each, if possible. No more than that. Just the top priorities. At the moment I have some incomplete code with the intent of changing the youth development model – which I intend to complete once I get in the mood to do it (hopefully very soon).
After that, I was thinking about maybe fixing other things that have been neglected for a long time, such as the newspaper. I was also planning to add a small mobile-version of our website, just with the very basics for you to admin your team on-the-go (something that would fit well on an iphone screen, for example).
I’m not sure going back to the old system or getting rid of some countries a good thing now, both of them have positive aspects and were made with much effort from the developers, I just think any adjustment to be made must take consideration on how they will afect new managers in the game, the more we make harder for new managers so succeed the less people we’ll have in the game…
Not really on topic as you have discussed everything already but if this game was turned into a phone app the managers wud greatly increase and it would generate money..
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