Posts that Fabio Moraes is monitoring

Subscribe to Posts that Fabio Moraes is monitoring 61 post(s) found

November 30, 2015 22:43
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Completely agree with you Fabio and I’ve posted my findings and plans in the other topic about Recent Changes. This is not due to players improving without playing (even though this speeds up player improvement for sure), but due to an old change to allow lower ranked countries to generate good players that had a bad impact over the years. This change has been now partially backed out but it would take another few years for us to see it take effect, that’s why we are going to act soon and shake the player evolution model as it is.

 
August 01, 2015 12:46
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

It’s always been interesting to observe how FastTicker seems to have better quality players overall than MediumTicker. We have not put anything specific in the game to make them different in that aspect, so I can only blame the fact it’s been running for twice as many seasons and that’s a long term side effect of our player evolution model. Lowering the stats a bit could help with the issue in the short term, but to be honest we plan to review the player evolution model soon (maybe after player star rating and one extra player feature) so it’s worth waiting. It could make sense to reset it then.

Back to the topic’s subject, I think economy makes more sense since the changes. I haven’t checked how rich the richest teams have become in a while, but hopefully the next player related game improvements will help to control it in some interesting ways :-)

 
August 01, 2015 10:55
Joseppi Kennedi 277 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

I agree with FT, there are far too many good players on TL. Ok they are not great players but they add quality to lower teams, I’m actually wondering if it would be worth resetting FT?

Maybe the GMs could lower the stats of each player a little more so less great players show up.

Mediumticker seems to be working really well.

 
July 31, 2015 17:17
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Haven’t noticed what you said about FT. In general I’m positive about the changes.

 
June 13, 2015 12:34
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Not many…very few actually, all in FastTicker of course. I suppose you meant $100M, that’s what I’m answering. Everyone has 100k…some are dangerously close to that number though :-)

 
June 13, 2015 10:26
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Are there many teams with over $100k already?

 
May 04, 2015 18:24
Filipe Silva 787 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Still too early to for people to be willing to sell their best players.

It is possible to find some nice ones thou, just bought two nice strikers for very cheap prices… Both from CPU teams and been in the transfer list for some time :D

 
May 04, 2015 13:21
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

The Sunderland players? ;)

Anyway, I sell players when I think they’re not good enough and to make room for new players. I wonder if there are managers who are selling (good) players because they need the money. I think gamewise it’s a good thing if that would happen. For that there needs to be some shortage of money, and little or no inflation. So the goal should be to reduce +170M to around 0M. Do you agree?

 
May 04, 2015 11:02
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Don’t be so harsh, I see some good players for sale. Notice I said good, not excellent ;-)

 
May 04, 2015 10:21
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Gabriel, if I remember correctly, didn’t you post somewhere that you hoped that people would be selling players? Even good ones?

 
May 04, 2015 05:42
Davison 828 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

first 3 season sure anything after that no

 
May 04, 2015 00:12
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

I’m all for a bonus for new players, it certainly hepls to keep them coming back until they’re really into playing the game. One thing I’ve already discussed with Danilo is to have a better in-game help, we definitely need that to provide minimal guidance for new players as well. Once they understand the basics they can always rely on the forums to get that extra help.

 
May 03, 2015 21:52
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Well, there is a certain game (I won’t mention the name, but it is based on Soccersim) that does have bankrupts and managed to attract hunderds of new players. So I don’t think these things have to bite each other.

But a bonus for new players might be a good idea.

 
May 03, 2015 17:43
Filipe Silva 787 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Now more then ever we should focus on trying to get more people to play the game. Making it even more dificult for newcomers wont help…

BTW Gabriel, you should consider giving new managers some kind of advantages when they start playing the game, like extra board points to invest or extra money. Seems to me many people try to play but cant do much so they quit…

 
May 03, 2015 14:16
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

It would just be an extra challenge :)

Also it’s not that different from joining a club with few investment points I think?

 
May 03, 2015 10:01
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

That wouldn’t be fair to new managers or even managers changing teams, they would most likely join a team on its way to bankruptcy :-P

 
May 02, 2015 16:10
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Is it an option to make some AI teams lose money (or even go bankrupt)? To balance that most human teams will have a positive balance?

 
April 30, 2015 10:04
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Joseppi is right. We can continue this discussion in the right topic , if needed.

 
April 30, 2015 09:28
Joseppi Kennedi 277 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

They get more points for playing in league games and cup games than doing nothing. 100% stamina is as if they played a friendly every tick.

 
April 30, 2015 08:10
Paulo Marques 13 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

@Gabriel: thanks for the info. In fact, if the total money doubled, it shows that some clubs are making real profits. They will probably be on the market then, moving some money around. Lets wait and see then :) meanwhile, keep up the good work! :)

@Filipe: the info that Gabriel gave is important and throws down my argument for now. About the last league, I got eliminated in the cup, way too soon (and by you :)) and with no european competitions and a great deal of luck, made it possible to win the league. In terms of players, my squad isnt that big of a deal yet :)

@Dimitri: by investments, i mean all kinds. Our taxes go to the state, so indirectly, it can be considered state investmens in the clubs.

Cheers!

 
April 30, 2015 03:37
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Not the right topic to ask this, but I’ll answer anyway. The players that are fully fit (100 stamina and no injury) will gain experience on non-match days as if they had played a friendly. Nothing else changes, meaning the amount of experience they need to improve depends on your coaching level.

 
April 29, 2015 19:52
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

I think adding a new way to spend money is a good idea. It is logical that the total money will normally increase, as there will (and should) be few teams with a negative balance. So the teams that have a very positive balance should be triggered to spend money. Bigger squads is an idea, and/or the classic youth academy? Even taxes I would be ok with.

Off topic: “To the richer clubs, to Barcelona, Real Madrid’s, Man City’s, etc… And how did those clubs got rich? Definitily not by selling players. They got rich due to good results, sponsorship and investment.”

I thought Barcelona and Real Madrid got rich with our tax money…

 
April 29, 2015 19:22
Filipe Silva 787 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

I understand your point Paulo, but I dont think we can yet compare that part of the game to real life yet…

Teams will always want to buy better players, I’m always in the market trying to sell my players and possibly replace them for better ones, (clearly still not enough to beat you in the league).

As Gabriel pointed, money has almost double in FT, thats something you dont see in real life, and something to be aware… You can argue less successful teams are getting to much money, dont think that would be good for the game either as those managers would perform even worse and eventually give up…

Looking forward for those implements Gabriel :D

Cheers

 
April 29, 2015 04:00
Gabriel Cesario 4,076 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Nice discussion folks. I’ve just done the same analysis with my club and after disregarding players bought and sold my profit was $362k. If I take into account players bought and sold the profit jumps to $4.7M.

Overall FastTicker’s total money jumped from $6.6B to $12.5B, which is definitely quite a lot and something to be looked at in the near future. Apparently that money is not being concentrated in the hands of a few teams, as the most rich teams have around $30M and the poorest around $4-$5M. What seems to be happening is that teams with high salaries are either losing a bit of money or making very little while good performing teams with low salaries are getting richer.

You could argue either way about having a fair money distribution between teams, so let’s not go there yet. I tend to agree that salaries should be lowered a bit overall, but not before we have either a new way to spend money or morale implemented and the squad limit removed or increased. Then it will be up to the manager to balance the money spent on salaries, squad size, other expenses, etc.

@Paulo: reason to buy players is to kick everyone’s arses, even if I have to lose a bit of money for some time ;-)

 
April 28, 2015 23:02
Paulo Marques 13 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Sure Filipe, but how about the reason to buy players?

A club buys players to achieve good results. In turn, good results provide good financial rewards. If the rewards aren’t enough to cope with the expenses, what is the point of buying players?

Think real life now, we are both portuguese and we know that our clubs sell to survive. But they sell to whom? To the richer clubs, to Barcelona, Real Madrid’s, Man City’s, etc… And how did those clubs got rich? Definitily not by selling players. They got rich due to good results, sponsorship and investment.

If those rich clubs didn’t exist, we wouldn’t have anyone to pay 20 or 30M for our best players. If they couldn’t be sold at those prices, there would be no motivation to sell.
My point is, selling to survive only works if there are rich clubs in the market.

If this economy model tries to make us all sell to survive, it will not hold because there will be no buyers.

I hope I have managed to explain my point. I will shut up now :)

Cheers

 
April 28, 2015 20:51
Filipe Silva 787 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Profit from tickets and sponsors shoudnt ever be an objective, we have seen what happens to the game without a stable transfer market. A good market is achieved by giving managers reasons to sell players, it should be the only way to make real profit…

 
April 28, 2015 18:26
Paulo Marques 13 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Dirk,

I understand your point. In the real world, a club only has a chance to get rich if playing in the CL, I can understand that approach.
Your club is a great example. Spanish champion, semi finals of CL and cup runner-up. Can I ask you what was your profit, excluding player transfers?

Cheers!

 
April 28, 2015 17:16
Dirk 624 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Paulo

My salaries cost me $934,947. I also only spend half of the wage limit. I don’t think it’s too high but you need to play matches in all 3 competitions.
CL matches gave me lots of profit but in the period without I have to manage my salaries. That’s one of the aspects that make the game interesting. It’s a manager game after all.

Cheers

 
April 28, 2015 16:16
Paulo Marques 13 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

Dimitri,

I can’t agree with you for several reasons.
First of all, the most profitable clubs in the world pay high salaries to their players and staff, that’s just the way it is. They make up for it in sponsorship, attendance, marketing, etc.

Secondly, a professional football club is supposed to be profitable. If I’m told my wage limit is 1.5M and I only spend half of it, I expect profit, it is only logical.

Also, I would like to see which football club having a full stadium (100 000 seats) when playing at home, would charge about $10 per ticket on a league match, while fighting for the title :)

Cheers!

 
April 28, 2015 13:24
Dimitri 600 posts(s)

Topic: Economy

You have very high salaries (your wage total is almost double of mine) and still make a profit….

So no, the impact is not way too high.