Wow CPU team blow their money away in mediumticker.

Example:
Stefano Leonardi http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/133963
Age: 29
Estimated Value: $16,612,107

Passing: 87
Shooting: 95
Speed: 89
Dribble: 86
Control: 80
Header: 94

Buy player
transfer price: $29,000,000

Current Negotiations

16-computer CAI Comodoro Riv ($29,000,000)
16-computer Burnley ($29,000,000)
16-computer AC Ajaccio ($29,000,000)
16-computer Gueugnon ($29,000,000)
16-computer Libourne ($29,000,000)
16-computer Hansa Rostock ($29,000,000)
16-computer FSV Mainz 05 ($29,000,000)
16-computer Freamunde ($29,000,000)
16-computer Feirense ($29,000,000)
16-computer Portimonense ($29,000,000)

No human manager team would pay 29M for this guy and CPU team are fighting for him.

Seems the changes were not so small after all… But hey, Davison will say this is a great thing :D

it is a great thing let the humans have the fun

I have to agree, it seems like the cpu in fast tick also have the “spending big” bug…

So far I have seen 80M for an average midfielder, 50M for Davison’s crappy one, 50+ for crappy crappy keepers… Sure its fun when you only have crappy players and you still can sell them, not as much for those managers who work hard to get good players, neither for the new manager who will get the 80M wasted money team… I am sorry to say this but it is what I think since this all started, most complaining about CPU non buying managers are simply incompetent managers who let their teams get to a place where they only have crappy players, no wonder they get pissed if CPU teams dont buy them anymore… Sorry for the honesty…

don’t be sorry filipe.

i have to agree with you on this one. I just sold a keeper for 35mil (max value game will allow me to sell him) and although the influx of money is nice, its just not good.
good price for him would be 10-15mil, but 35mil is very high. A little more tweaking is needed in my opinion.

I understand we said “we want CPU to buy players” and now we’re saying “they are paying too much” so maybe we can find common ground in between.

If i may say, the market wasn’t bad prior to when all these changes came into play back in september (i think it was in septmeber when the changes were first made)

It just seems now that we’ve gone from not buying enough, to buying too much and paying too much.

After 1 season all CPU’s have wasted their money and we’re back with not buying :D

I just have sold my keeper Fischer for 60M. He was on the transferlist for 40M and more than 10 CPU were bidding. I was wondering how far CPU’s would go so I changed the price to 60M. Still 2 CPU’s were bidding and Kickers bought Fisher for 60M. I don’t think a human team would spend the amount for him. He’s good but not that good.

I agree CPU’s had to be smarter and buy the players they needed but IMO they need a logic that tells them if the transfer price of a player is cheap, ok or expensive.

Well, they do have a logic to limit the amount of money they will spend on a player. It depends on the impact the player will have on the squad and the amount of money available. Maybe the next step now is tweak this formula.

Gabriel, why not put all the money in the game into a pool, that is constant (well, it could be able to be tweaked to mirror currency devaluation etc later on..) then all money is constant, that is the amount of money to exists in a game world.

Example, to keep it simple say we have a total of all clubs money is 100 dollars, then they have 30 dollars for wage costs and 15 development, 10 stadium building etc..
That money should go to an “account” and from there it would be brought back to the pool in form of match income, bids from Non human players etc..
Just some thoughts. It might balance things a little bit. Then you can add more advance things like increase/decrease the total amount of money say by 10% from season to season just to add some variation.

BK

Hello,

The problem is that the CPU teams should only Buy players in a good business, half of the value price is the top that a CPU Team should give for a player… like I Think it was in the past…

Best Regards

Yes, something like Dcaniva says seems a good idea.

couple of days into the new cpu behaviour…

looks to be a bit better…

what do you guys think?

seems like CPU guys ran out of money :)

Medium ticker they are still buying, not as much though. Its kinda expected such a big burst considering alot of teams hadnt been spending money.. Over the next 2 weeks this should really cut down.

Yep, all the pressure for changes usually gets this result… When this wave ends the market will frozen again, some weak teams with good managers will certainly raise as they made great money, teams with bad managers will continue to do bad as they will waste the extra money and wont find as good players as the top teams now even richer than before… The only diference now is that it will be impossible for a new manager to find a team with conditions to grow and so more new managers will quit the game prematurely… But hey, no one saw this coming :P

After reading the posts, probably the fact about non realistic prices can be right, and studied, even at the middle seasons the prices were much higher lately the prices have decreased. But my first impression is that it is very good that the money ran/moves, this way all teams have access to sell/buy not only reach teams decides the market.

Very unrealistic,
Rogério Ribeiro
sold for 80,000,000 Transfered from Blackburn Rovers to San Lorenzo, he is good, but in the current market, this is way too much….. 80M, hopefully we dont see this very often.

the whole thing is a bit weird but excellent opportunity for developers to research what happens when there is too much money generated to clubs.

BK

Maybe add a simple rule for computer managed teams: don’t pay more than player value?

Good idea Dimitri.

The market is impossible.

Player value should be removed completely.
No player in real life is walking around with a price tag, but the club and manager know his value.
It should be pretty interesting thing to see, how people would value players..

BK

or a simple rule of cant buy a player for more than est value

there is no such thing as estimated value, it is calculated depending on how skilled a player is and where he plays, maybe nationality etc, but clubs know what their players are worth depending on what they cost etc..

A more realistic value to show would be the last transfer price. For example player is worth 10M but was transferred for 20M, the value is 20M, if you agree or not that is a different thing and doesn’t really matter.
Yes, if he is worth 20M but transferred for 10M then the value is that, that is undervaluation. The board/club should oppose selling a player for less than he is both if it’s not absolutely necessary. Board would also object paying overprice and whether it is overprice or not can be determined with what the new player will bring to the own club, is it worth the cost?
Maybe having a separate transfer budget would restrict overspending but at the end the manager makes the good/bad calls.

I think having separate routines/code for human managed clubs and computer managed clubs is a must to make the game world more interesting, same rules can not be applied from one to the other.

BK

maybe taking away player value is a good thing. It should be replaced though with stars or something simular. If older players remember back you could have three silver/gold stars depending how well your player was developing. We could change this to 5 stars, obviously starting with none when they are youth players then getting one silver, two etc etc then moving onto gold. Hope that makes sense lol

I have to admit the star system is something i definitely miss from SS/MS days…

I don’t see at all how this helps to fix the current cpu behaviour.

Some kind of valuation will always be needed, if it is hidden or not makes no difference to me. CPU behaviour needs much work and I hope our developers can do something good with all this but in the end I believe the only way will always to have more human players managing teams and keep them playing the game, something hard when all the teams they can get are now bankrupt or close to that…

Dimitri, programming will fix the cpu behavior, but what has to be done before the programming part is to know how the best result would be achieved and how things should work. Since no one of us or the programmers are experts on that part, it would take some tweaking to get to a good and balanced formula. And the whole point with us being in a forum to share thoughts and ideas maybe something will spark an idea to make something better.

By writing MY thoughts with the valuation, I mean the valuation is wrong/unnecessary to show, that is the calculated value, depending on x number of parameters. Let the computer know how much a player should at most cost for a computer to purchase. Then display a value (last purchased price) for the players, if you really need to see the values, which has absolutely no meaning for me, as the keeping skill for outfield players. If my suggestions here would have been implemented, the computer wouldn’t pay the overprices. That would kind of help.

BK

Well, I believe that if we look back to the last changes on the CPU behavior, we will find out that the market was a little more balanced before all these changes happen – by this, I mean before the first change, where CPU started to pay more attention on youth development and stopped buying middle age 86 average players…

Looking at the market now, too much money is being spent in (below) average players – and not only by CPU managers. I think that everyone started to see how human managers are already spending inconsequently the money earned easily after the last CPU behavior changes…

Currently, it is easy to earn money, but it is very demanding to find an opportunity to spend it wisely. Money appears to be everywhere, and you find yourself always competing with other ten or fifteen teams when biding on a young player, what also makes wages rise absurdly… If you have a decent first team, you will probably find yourself having to offer a wage of more than 14,000 for a 17 years old 69 average player!

If we look back, all these changes first began in order to make CPU managers invest more on youth players – and why is it important? I really can’t see why. In a way, since this first change happened, it looks like the game became “more fun” to CPU managers, and less fun to human managers.

I really don’t care if CPU managers don’t bid in youth promises or if they sell them for a low price. If this happens, it means that a human manager has signed this player and that in the future a human managed team will have a stronger team – and that is what this game is all about! I don’t care if the CPU manager make dumb decisions and sell a good promise for his “face value”. Personally, if I was willing to play against intelligent CPU managers, I would be playing the good and old CM3, and not an online game…

I will not question here if there is too much teams available for too few human players, because this is a point to be discussed in another topic…

Well, IMHO, I would like to see CPU managers behaving like they used to behave 3 or 4 months ago: selling more players, buying less players and spending less money when doing business. By doing this, it is also easier for new players – if they assume a formerly CPU managed team, it will not be bankrupt and he will have space to build a team by his own with players available in the market, what is almost impossible now…

Paulo, good points but I’d like to add something to them.

I do not agree all “cpu managers” would behave the same, ie buy less, sell more. I think there should be at least 4 different types of “cpu managers”:
- those interested in developing players
- those winning as much as possible
- those interested in making as much money as possible for the board/shareholders (more like a business)
- a mixture of the above?

and so on. And as you notice I haven’t written what those types mean really, but there is deeper meaning than just the words they represent of course.

BK