Recent Posts
18,542 posts(s) found
The guy who is selling this player is a co-worker. :-D
I agree with most of what you’ve said. Soon we’ll go back to these transfers and wages regulations, I’ve worked on them for a while and them went back to other features (players side, home team advantage, stadium reduction and increasing the number of seats), as soon as I’m done with these (maybe board expectations for next season also) I’ll add some new rules to transfers, hopefully for the best.
Cheers!
This is for everyone:
I want to know who is willing to pay $50,000,000 for a 30-year-old defender that does not even reach the 90 rating mark in Tackle?
i was looking at the transfer list for Brazil, (ok I know that in real life Brazil has the best players in the WORLD, and in Ruby Soccer they are developed prey good), but when I saw Hilton Ximenes with rating of 87 for $50,000,000 I almost fell out of my chair,
First of all he has a wage of $102,000 that is more than half of what I pay for my entire Team (and I have 9 players with 80+ rating)
Second he is already 30 years old I doubt that he will ever get to 90+
I think that the current problem with the game is that there are no limits on the Transferring of players, I think that there should be a Maximum amount that a players could be sold, I do not think that 99% of the teams could not afford payers like this, I do not think that reducing stadiums will be the solution for the financial problems of certain teams, I think that it should start with the Transfer system, here should be a regulation of all the prices and of all the wages, there would be maximums and minimums.
I just want to know out of all the managers who is willing to take the risk of paying a huge amount of money for a player that is going to take them bankrupt.
It is clear that some Managers are manipulating the Transfers of all the nations; they buy a good player because they know they have the money and then they wait the minimum amount of turns to resell the players for an elevated cost that none of us could afford.
no, they doesnt for different zones. an attacker would have the same attributes if playing in the middle of the field, for example.
cheers
Does those penalties apply also for players on different pitch zones?
I understand these apply to sides, but what about pitch zones? Can I have a defender playing on attack or midfield, or a attacker playing on defense, without penalties on these players performance?
let us consider the player X (right side player), with the following attributes (note I have covered a good range in the attributes):
shooting 100
passing 90
tackle 80
speed 70
control 60
dribble 50
keeping 40
aggres 30
the maximum penalty is 3. therefore, here is how player X would play in the left side of the field (note that I have put the capacity % aside of each of the attributes):
shooting 97 (97%)
passing 87 (96.6%)
tackle 77 (96.3%)
speed 67 (95.7%)
control 57 (95%)
dribble 47 (94%)
keeping 37 (92.5%)
aggres 33 (N/A)
cheers
So they just play at for example 80% of their normal possibilties. Or am I wrong.
all attributes.
cheers
Hi,
those penalties are applied to what? Player performance on that match?
Tks
Well, my 2nd best striker is an AR, and now I will have a problem at my midfield also , but I don´t see much problem with it, it´s a matter of tweaking the tactics.
Also, even if now seems hard adapting to it, it surely shows you guys keep on developing this game, and our task is to test it.
People seem to forget that a lot.
Bring the changes, the good ones.
Cheers
Not many people voted about what to do regarding the players side feature but honestly I think there is not much to worry about. Even though the most voted option was to balance the sides per zone I think that would still make some people unhappy, as a team may end up with the worst attackers as the center ones for instance, and if the difference between the best attackers and the worst is not small, it is better to use a good one in the wrong side.
Anyway, sides will remain the way they are, some will complain, but they’ll see their teams won’t play much worse because of that and they’ll be able to balance the sides in a relatively short period, what is also good for the market.
Just to review the penalties for playing in the wrong side (remember these affects all attributes):
L LC C RC R
L 0 0 -1 -2 -3
C -3 0 0 0 -3
R -3 -2 -1 0 0
Rows represent the player side and the columns represent the side they are playing.
These will start on next season on both dimension. I’m sure this is an interesting feature for the game despite this initial discussion it caused :-)
p.s.: multi-sided player will probably be added in the future (LC, RC, LR and LCR)
Have you fogotten, Danilo, that Curintia has The Little Farm (Fazendinha)??? kkkkkk
Lobba
by some do you mean corinthians? :D
Wouldn’t that also be unfair to some people? Besides, some teams hve huge stadiums in real life while some don’t even have a stadium!
Cheers.
Thanks, at least for first round that would be nice
Why not set the new stadiums capacity based on the real-life stats for each team?
I’m planning stadium reduction on next season’s start. Not a big reduction as I intended to do, but to something around 40000 seats. Ideally smaller teams should have a smaller stadium, but at this point we had lots of promotions/relegations, specially on FastTicker, and some teams which were smaller in the beginning had improved a lot, so it could be unfair to some of them. Another option would be resizing all stadiums based on teams’ quality (bigger for the best), but this also would lead to a lot of discussion and unhappy managers. To sum up, without resetting the dimensions the best way to do that seems to be everybody with same size stadiums, 40000.
We’ll still discuss the logic to increase the number of seats and will let you know as soon as we have something in mind. Let’s wait for the side discussion to end before we start another one :-)
Cheers!
i am thinking about building a survey mini-app to help us with those decisions …
np, the only numbers we already dont have in DB are for friendlies. the rest are there, it is only a matter of building another way to show them up to you guys. lets see if we can come up with something…
cheers!
yep, i think the training will make a lot of difference on that.
cheers
As some of you may have noticed FastTicker got stuck 5 hours ago. It will tick in 2 minutes. I’m thinking of postponing or anticipating the following ticks in order to rearrange the competitions in their usual time.
Cheers!
I see option 3 is winning so far even though I agree with Fabrizio for 3 reasons:
1) The ones he alredy stated, it would boost the commerce and be a challenge
2) If you have a good team, a few players in the wrong side won’t affect your results that much, you’ll have enough time to find better players in the right sides
3) Balancing the things as stated in option 3 will only give you a chance to have players for all sides, but you may end up with your best players on a specific position playing in the same side, which is not that different from the random situation we have now.
That’s my two cents. Seasons are approaching their end so we’d better decide what to do soon :-)
Cheers!
Yeah, I’m pretty sure scouts and coaches feedback will help a lot on that. Maybe in the future we could make the initial improvement phase be faster than it is now. We’ll see.
Cheers!
Danilo… The only results I felt bad for are in university and cannot be erased lol I was just questioning perfectionism and erasing errors as nobody is perfect right? So perfectionists commit errors and live with them I suppose… I wil not waste more lines with these…
I have doubts about stats by formation, for this point of view, managers do change the formation, and now with substitutions, formation can be changed in the same game.
Stats by type of game could be more useful like stats for league games, and stats for friendlies, or other type of games. To me, it’s important to know in league/official games team results, in friendlies I care about player stats…
It’s different, formation is not important to me, the type of game and analysis are… And that’s my feedback… I hope to improve the debate!
Cheers…
I agree that if the players improve too fast the game will be less challenging but the opposite is also not so good IMO. If we wait too long to see if the promising player is gonna meet the expectations or not there is no point signing new players because you have to play the ones you already have for a long period of time to know the answer.That means less transfer activity which could hurt the game.I for one enjoy scouting through transfer lists and making transfers . Anyway I hope more indications would be added in the future like improvement in their secondary skills or a msg from your training coaches etc..ohh and training would definitely be a great feature to have and i hope its on your to-do list.
Thanks for the replies and listening,
Cheers
I have already this posted before but as you asked for suggestions… I miss the graphic chart displaying the position of the club during a season and a more detailed club history with players’ negotiations.
Maybe I miss those things because I played soccersim/managersim for so long.
But every statistics is welcome!
I don’t know if Danilo thought about this, but the formation stats could show us an average of various aspects of the game such as shots at target, off-sides, goals made and goals suffered.
It should be very handy!
Lobba
Well, I think managers should accept the current situation and start looking for options in the market. It would boost the commerce in both servers if everybody turned to look the market as an answer to this problem. For example: my two best attackers are R sided, so I put one of them to sell so I can buy a good L sided attacker to replace him.
Also the way it is now gives the game an aditional challenge to the managers who had to rethink their tatics and positioning.
I vote for 1.
Lobba
Well, have you never played a game where you felt bad about your stats? My father-in-law loves to erase his solitaire (windows) stats. With manager rankings there is no need to do that, because you can “easily” go to the top or the bottom of the ranking.
Moreover, we already have almost all of the stats you mentioned, for a manager/team. It is only a matter of building a screen to do the sum job for the manager (i see no problem in doing that). Will discuss our options with Gabriel and expose them here to check more opinions.
For the manager stats, I think I have an idea for something that we dont have already. Lets hear your opinion on that. What if we had formation stats? This way you would be able to have an indicator of how successful are each of your formations/tactics. Dont know yet if this is a good idea, but we can all think about it together.
I guess that what I am trying to say is that I would like to know how everybody fells about this matter. What stats/screens do you guys fell that would be nice to have/change the way we present? Lets use our potential as a free game. :)
As for the players stats, I totally agree with you both. The more stats we can have, better. We already have a lot in queue to implement, but keep the ideas coming!
cheers
I also choose option 3.
I have to leave. I’ll explain my point later.
Cheers!
I totally agree about player stats. And manager stats, well, we do need more info for the manager history, will see. Thanks for your suggestions!
Cheers!
Yeah, I’m aware of these mistakes in the pt-br translation (and also lots of things not translated). Let us know if you see anything else.
About the formation, it records the one you end the game with, that shouldn’t be hard to change. I’ll add a bug for us.
Cheers!