Recent Posts
18,535 posts(s) found
i voted yes and it was hard because i have doubts about both options.
What about a random system. Some players will grow faster as youngest and some players will grow more around 23 to 25-6… that way manegers will have to figure out in what growing path the player will grow and that will give the chance to pick up players left in the market which will improve a great deal overtime, that will be good for weakers teams….
Maybe…..
salud
damago
According to the rules being suggested, 21 yrs old players will still be able to grow, the average would be kept on 25 yrs old as it is now, we’re only making it faster in the first years and a little bit slower in the following ones. I’ll count your vote as no.
YES: Parag, Philipp, Alexander, thorpedo, DaMaGo (5)
NO: Sly, Hopjes, Alban, Luc (4)
Top midfilder for an exelent price:
Adriano Castilleros
Posição: M
Lado: L
Guarda-Redes: 48
Desarme: 69
Passe: 100
Remate: 78
Velocidade: 83
Drible: 94
Controle: 100
Cabeceamento: 80
Current price: 55M
Other good players availiable at Benfica, take a look….
Gabriel
Please dont take away the prospect that at 21yrs old they can still grow and a few rough diamonds are out there.
Damago can vouch for this but i sold my A88 striker at 23yrs old and he continued to grow to a A92 when i last looked.
The easier you make it for big clubs the harder this fast tick will get for beginners. Look at my Monaco, except for the free listed player wages, pushing the bankruptcy theory. LOL
I have bought some nice 21 22 year olds at small ticket prices, they are growing and giving me hope of a decent squad in 1.5 seasons since i started.
I would vote to keep your current change as is for at least two full seasons before we could quantify its success. Guys dont become too impatient.
I believe more energies in the tactic algorithms would be better invested in our time
cheers Luc
More useful old players were already in our plans. My initial idea was that their presence would give other players some kind of bonus. I also like the experience suggestion, we could use it instead. So your vote is tied to this other enhancement…well, I could do both at once so I’ll consider it a yes.
YES: Parag, Philipp, Alexander, thorpedo, DaMaGo (5)
NO: Sly, Hopjes, Alban (3)
I am for Thorpedo’s suggestion. A player with high experience should be more valuable for the club. I would also add some international experience.
I can find me in this suggestion.
But I guess we have to make a system that older players doesn’t make useless. For instance, an older player has more experience and will make less mistakes in a match. So I suggest a system with experience points. To make it easy a player gets every season 10 experience points starting when he leaves youth academy. These experience points can be used in a ratio like keepers do it for heading.
Let’s say a player uses 80% skills (first & second ones) and 20% experience points for his performance in a match.
So my vote is a yes, as long as there comes a system for older players.
The coaching effect is faster improvement, but limited to the current potential. So let’s say you’ve got a player has 10% of his potential to improve. With coaching 10 it would take him half season while it would take him 1 season with coaching 5 and 2 seasons with coaching 0. So if you have coaching 10, you’d unleash all his available potential in half season and would have to wait until the next season (when he gets more points) to continue improving the player. You may think it’s not worth to have coaching 10, but it’s useful when you get underdeveloped players from the market or when you want to see the players potential faster. These are not the exact numbers, it all depends on the matches being played, but I guess you’ve got the idea.
So my suggestion for voting is around 15% of potential every season from 16 to 19 years (turns 20 with 60% of potential released, 45% developed, in the average) and 8% for the following seasons (turns 24 with 100% of potential released, 92% developed, in the average…of course some players may still improve after that).
So thorpedo, what is your vote? :)
I’ve just checked some dutch teams finances, they’re building up in a reasonable pace, maybe it’s ok to start the way they are right now…we’ll see.
The stadium size will still be related to the team expenses on its creation (player wages specifically), so if Luxembourg has cheaper players it will have smaller stadiums in the beginning ;)
Gabriel, what is the effect of the coach department right now. Will the player improve faster or will he just improve to the maximum potential he has which isn’t the case in a level 5.
Let me clarify my opinion. I don’t want a system that improve players to their maximum on the age of 22. Let that be clear.
If your intention is to make a little faster improvement in the first years (60% – 40% or someting like that) I’m ok with the change. But there may not be a reach of maximum potential @ 22
So can you clarify what you suggest to implete.
After that I will give a clear yes/no.
Thanks =)
I think Netherlands should have bigger stadiums, but Luxembourg – smaller =)
Gabriel, thorpedo votes NO not yes, since if you are level 10 like him you have a player at his maximum @ 23….. so in his case he meens NO since players currently won’t reach there maximum at 27, otherwise he would vote yes…
so that makes it 4-4 in votes if you ask me….
Wouldn’t that be unfair with Netherlands? Unless you’re suggesting I expand dutch teams stadiums as well :)
What if I double the stadium size generated by the current logic, sounds ok?
but currently it#s even harder to recover. the groups matches are every 3 turns …
anyway. i think bigger teams (who wanna compete succesfully in many competions) have to deal with that stress. That should be part of the game: the challenge to deal with participating and playing competitions simultanous.
but lets give them good infrastructures in the beginning… they might struggle to generate revenue with 10000 size stadiums in the beginning…
yah… that would be good :)
We already have tiredness. If you watch the replay you’ll see the players running much more on match start than near match end. But it only affects speed. Also, players are always running on RubySoccer and we know that’s not realistic. This can be improved, for sure.
When the GK catches the ball he waits from 10 to 30 seconds before passing.
Wait and see, more countries will be added soon. I don’t promise that many countries already on next season but we’ll do our best to keep them coming ;)
Update
YES: Parag, Philipp, Alexander, thorpedo, DaMaGo (5)
NO: Sly, Hopjes, Alban (3)
Well, that could be easily changed but those competitions will start earlier anyway when we have enough teams. Starting later in the season gives you a chance to recover your players’ stamina after playing the national league and cup.
40 shots…shot on goal almost every 2 minutes. They had no time to aim =)
Gabriel, I already posted somewhere that because of the number of shots (at least 20) the keepers were made too strong. The problem is that it takes not more than 30 seconds to bring the ball from the GK to the attackers. So if it was possible to implement some kind of….tiredness maybe, I don’t know…I just understand that in real life it is impossible to run as much as in Ruby =) So if a player ran 50 meters, he will need time to recharge. If the GK catches the ball he will need time to wait for his team to return to the original formation…
So many people are tired of Brazil #1 status ! Lets add 3 more South American and 3 more European countries !!! It will be much more challenging in a couple of season already !
I totally agree !!! It will be easier a lot ! I just can’t wait till the LA starts ! =)
My couple of points:
1) we need at least 10 more countries for balanced skills and players’ transfers
2) we could change from 120 points on average to 110 or 100. But don’t forget that lots of good players will only increase the importance of good tactics
My opinion is NO. If we speed up the youth growing process, it will make everything more predictable, less future stars will go on a free transfer list….but it is more real
I must admit I still have some issues with the new way players develop. I simply think it takes to long time to see any changes. I think it sounds reasonable that players shouldn’t peak at age 21-22, but it shouldn’t take so many experience point in order to grow. I will refer to my own player Davide Brollo (again): He has played a total of 108 matches 11 of these has been official games. He may or may not have star potential, but he does not grow. It’s like time stands still with this guy. I generally like the idea of a skill pool with 10-20% percent being released every season, but if you can’t get the players to improve even with a coaching level of 10 and a heck of games something is wrong.
my vote goes to YES.
abracos
damago
I like Philipp’s suggestion because the maximum potential is only reached at the age of 24 – 26. I think 22 is too soon to reach a maximum potential. Then everybody will search for new young players and you can’t sell old players anymore. And with old I mean players above 27. This is not good for the game I think.
So when the age of reaching maximum potential is 26 y.o. (or older) then I vote ‘yes’ otherwise ‘No’.
In this system we also need extra skill improvement by experience for older players. This makes it more interesting to buy or hold older players.
i don’t know if it’s just me, but i would prefer to start with the international matches earlier in the season. so there’d be the “international” athmosphere not just at the season end.
At the moment CL starts on turn 89 with qualifying. why not start the CL-season right after the cup finals ~t58? (with a bigger pause between group phase and round of 16) or at least on t74 (group matches 83,89, 95, 101, 107, 113).
what do you think?
We had an enhancement for that and it was canceled. I guess we have more pros than cons in this case. I’ll reopen it.