I think in real life shots from angles are very effective. So many teams play with LC+RC and it works. But why did I waste all those 400M+ on midfielders with 80+ in shooting ? In real life midfielders score VERY OFTEN, in Ruby only by chance, once in 20 matches, maybe more often…

Few posts from the admins only thread about new mailing editor :
Sly – I prefer very simple mailing. This just suxx
Philipp Leibeck – thanks for the effort, though for ingame mailing a plain notepad is enough imo. the new version has a lot to offer, but is not necessary/adequate.
Vaughn – rather see a simple friends list to choose from :)

I personally think it’s unnecessary, but we decided to give it a try ;)

By the way, don’t think we wasted our time with this new mailing editor, we got this free functionality from another website, it was just a matter of adding a few lines of code so we won’t be sad if we don’t use it.

the latest one is really cool…

this one is good yeah ! Cleanup code if for html codes?

Yep, just ignore it, usually :). It is a standard button from this editor tool, on the simplest mode.

% of matches won.
I don’t like. Just kills my eyes now. Besides, a club with highest victory % can still lose the title. At least arithmetically.

It’s % of points won, no matches :)
This is pretty common on brazilian league tables, that’s why I’ve added this information. Anybody else liked / disliked it?

i have no clue what it’s good for…and it only annoys me alot since everytime i look i think those are the points.

Gotta admit i really dislike this, sorry guys :)

i just want the final column at the end to be points column…
well… if you could put percentage inside the brackets, that could stop confusing us… but i am not sure how the design would look like???

I’ll remove it until we find a better way to add this information ;)

Gotta admit i really dislike this, sorry guys :) ²

PS: I suggested this change. :)

Players with more than 30 years old did not receive the -3 penalty on all skills when their team is playing as a visitor. This change was made to represent the experience acquired by older players.

This should provide as an incentive to keep aged players…

Just made the announcement clearer…it’s for players with 31 years old or more ;)

“Beware of your players stamina! Next season the rules will be more strict affecting the overall skills of the players instead of only their recovery after running. Every 3 points below 100 stamina will reduce all skills by 1%.”
- Nice one…
just to make it more precise, is the following data correct?

(100-3)=97 = -1%
(100-4)=96 = -2%
(100-5)=95 = -3%
.
.
.
(100-96)=4 = -93%
(100-97)=3 = -94%
(*more chances of mistake in calculation by a manager, especially in his first season)

how about making it the follows??
(100-1)=99 = -1%
(100-2)=98 = -2%
(100-3)=97 = -3%
.
.
.
(100-96)=4 = -96%
(100-97)=3 = -97%

This one is more easy for managers to understand and thus they will make less mistakes in calculations especially if you are new manager…

The correct calculation is:

Stamina: penalty
100: 0%
99: 0%
98: 0%
97: -1%
96: -1%
95: -1%
94: -2%
…
4: -32%
3: -32%
2: -32%
1: -33%

ok.. just wanted things to be clear…
and one more thing, what does “recovery after running” means???

Currently stamina affects the players ability to recover during the match. The more tired a player harder it will be to recover. In practice, it means those with low stamina tends to become slower earlier in the match.

thx for the loan thingy!

that basically means they need some match warm-up :)

Loan Embargo
Does the punishment ever reset again?? may be after one season or after the manager has switched the teams…

just want to make things clear…

No, your loan embargo history is not reset so after letting a player go for the third time your embargo duration will always be 45 turns whenever you let that happen again.

Who will get the punishment?? the manager who hired or the manager who let him go…
Hypothetical situation:
Manager A hires player P who has been allowed to miss 6 matches. Suppose he misses the first 5 matches during manager A’s regime, and then the manager gets fired or leaves the team. Lets say CPU takes over some time and during that period he misses 1 more match. After that lets say a new manager B comes in and finds that loaned player was not good enough for the team. so, he doesn’t select him for the match but requests a loan termination to which the other team does not respond. (due to any reasons, financial or not being online at the moment or any other)

Now subsequently the player returns back after missing more than 6 matches.

Now, i am just curious as to how the punishment is divided over managers A, CPU and B. and what happens in case the loan termination request is not responded…??

EDIT: these kind of problems will occur in future, so, it is better to develop a consensus on how to tackle them before they arise…

In your example manager B would be punished since he was the one in charge when the loaned player missed the last match. I know, it doesn’t sound fair, but manager A was in his right when he made the player miss 5 matches since he was allowed to miss even 6 ;)

but what if the loan termination request was not granted???

It doesn’t matter, it is the responsibility of the team who loaned in the player to make sure the clauses are not broken. The other team has the option to reject or even ignore your termination request :)

ok:) guys… i guess thats crystal clear now;)

We can only fire one player per turn now? Why so low? If I take over a team, I want to rebuild it… it’ll take forever to get rid of the overpaid garbage, maybe 3 players per turn?

Just a thought.

mostly because cheaters love to enter a team and fire a lot of players – making it difficult for us to control the situation if we dont have enought time.