Recent Posts by Philipp Leibeck
375 posts(s) found
200k for each department
for a better usability of RS forums:
i would suggest to reverse the current logic of the listing of the postings in the forums: not appending new posts to the end of a thread anymore but to the top position (1st page). Currently it’s “first post … latest post”, but the order “latest post … first post” would save some time/clicks when looking into threads with more then 1 page (like "improvements).
For LOAN:
Lázaro Rodriguez Davila
Age: 21
Nationality: Spain
Club: Hertha BSC Berlin
Position: G
Side: -
Keeping: 89 <<<<
Tackle: 33
Passing: 63 <<
Shooting: 38
Speed: 71 <<<
Dribble: 60
Control: 81 <<<
Aggressiveness: 55
Hi, i really miss the ssim game world forums … like the subject “Transfers”, where everyone can do some propaganda for their recent sales or loans.
Just as a suggestion i start this for FastTicker players market right here in the games foum – till it’s integrated in the gameworlds.
@Gabriel & Danilo:
Please decide yourself if this idea is with you: Make it sticky or delete this thread.
btw, similiar threads (for both game worlds) could be: player requests, league chat, cheater, …
What do you think?
i find all option all right.
for option 3 i would suggest:
for stadiums you have a 1-time investment & a constant output (=capacity). But for staff (&their equipment) i’d prefer a certain fee (a month or year) you have to invest to keep the level of quality service and infrastructure. otherwise the quality in general and of the certain staff members will decrease.
i wouldn’t make a diference between small & big clubs – that’s always an easy suggestion by those who have minor clubs. buit it’s not what’s real life. Bigger clubs pay more (than minors) for better services (than minors can provide) not for equal (to minors) services …
Ups, i now just recognized Henrique bought this superb AC 92 shooter … congrats.
Everything went with the rules.
But even this splayer was 3 turn on TL, no one would look for brilliant players in the bottom section of the TL to find them. That’s the dissatisfying part of the action!
i would suggest to set the minimum sales price around 25% of the value. Otherwise the board would intefere. For player older than ~32 yro the minimum should be decreased to ~10%
all right, thx
What’s the routine of this mode?
I know it prevents from getting fired within 30 days. But what else i have to expect from this?
Will youths get a contract when they demand one?
Will player contracts be renewed automatically? For 1, 2 or 3 years?
Will player be put on TL for some (board) reason?
etc.
- official matches played
- Goals
- Assists
- MotM
- Ratings
- Red cards
Alright, thanks for taking care. Really appreciate your persistent effort on improvements.
I just want to add that i find this improvement mechanism strange in some ways … like: matches in league should give a bigger boost than friendlies and friendlies against strong players more than playing against a youth team …
this happened in fast ticker last night:
The player http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/4291 (age 24, DC with 85 in tackle) improved within 1 turn from 68 to 88 in passing – 20 POINTS !!!! … and he increased without playing a match !!!
hmmm
There is this midfielder:
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/16603 (fast ticker)
his history: In season 3 he had “-14” goals – how is this?
i checked some of this matches and he wasnt used as a goalie …
i miss a forum or board in fast ticker!
… where e.g. i can do some advertising for my sales ;)
On what conditions the intensity of a players improvement depends on?
Is it …
type of match (CL> league > friendly)
or strength of the opponent (team with ~90 > ~80> ~70)
or just the number of matches played (no matter with kind)?
Can a player improve to a 90shooter if he only plays friendlies against minor teams (~73)?
i can’t make an contract offer for any player:
Index →
RubySoccer System Error
Oops! It looks like there was an error. Please try again (this may be related to a server restart / high load).
me neither
Thanks for the quick implementation!
a- Do we have to put in the wage we offer the player before closing date or after all bids are closed?
b- Will there be a 3-turn? Like when the seller adjusted the demanded price by lowering the minimum.
hi there, any work on the “allowance to make a bid lower than the asked price” (see above) ?
i still think it would be a great step forward in the transfer policy …
allright, thx for the info, Gabriel.
On what logic the board cteate their opinion and does the board has any use ?
i mean, i have won the CL and the league 2 ticks ago and after season my board now says:
League expectation: Avoid relegation
Cup expectation: Reach the round of 16
International expectation: Do your best to pass the first round
“-3” means no matter where the player is used ? If an A plays M+1 or M-1 or D-1 etc he gets “-3” for all possible positions beyond A-zone ? Or will an A gets “-1” in M+1 and M, “-2” in M-1 and D+1, and “-3” in D and D-1 …
Alright, thanks for the update, Gabriel.
What’s the specified penalties table from next season on?
That’s what i meant above:
I have player Juan Sanz Niño (A) with 78 pass & 79 shoo, now he’s still an A ?!
Please tell me what’s your logic behind this whole topic …
You have a native D with 80 in tac & 80 in sho. He doesn’t have to be a great scorer (this should co-depend on other factors than shooting), but he’s able & interested in shooting – and that is just possible in front.
So what does this “A” stand for? The abbility to score or the abbility play in front ?
What’s the connection between the skill and the position (D & tac, M & pas, A & sho)?
Roberto Carlos= native D, good shooting/scored, tac > sho, but obviously a DA in real life ; in this game logic: D
Kaka= native M, great shooting, pas=sho —> MA; in this game logic: M
There are probably better RL examples for my point …
Gabriel thanks for your patience and explanations!
I just want to put this in consideration.
in your logic a player is “born” with a certain position (A, D, M) and gets a hybrid just if a second skill is higher than his native position skill (e.g. M=passing). I think this perspective is too limited.
What’s with a native “M” with 98 in passing and a 85 in shooting (Mr.X)
or a native “M” with 76 in passing and 74 in shooting (Mr. Y) etc.
Both players tend to have the ability playing upfront: Mr.X is a superb shooter and Mr. Y’s shooting skill is nearly as good as his passing … IMO both could/should be MA’s – in your logic both would be M’s …
option #1 (till season tick in fast ticker) PLUS option #3.
option #2 makes no sense if you plan to implement DM, MA & DA on a long term …
QUESTIONS:
What method do you plan to regenerate all players positions to DM, DA and MA (based on tackle, passing and shooting) ?
—> WILL THE HIGHEST SKILL DEFINE THE POSITION (D,M,A), and if the 2nd highest skill is just ~5% max. lower then he’s a hybrid (DA,DM, MA) ? WHAT’s THE RATIO FOR A HYBRID?
—> WILL IT BE DYNAMIC ? like, if tackle was the players worst skill he was an A or M and when he developed in tackling superb he becomes DA or DM …
I’m the manager of HERTHA BSC BERLIN, who’s obviously playing not fair when lining up “8” A’s.
I’m just playing with what the engine/creators support. Gabriel, i asked you some time ago if i should take care of not letting an A playing D. But you mentioned that “D, M, A” are just an “orientation” but a player is not dependend on a position (back, midfield, front).
So if you take a closer look on my squad, my defenders are A’s but have ~79 in tackle and just ~72 in shooting. So are they A’s ? My midfielders have ~78 in passing and ~75 in shooting. So are they A’s?
1. System allows it and supports it, so don’t change it from one tick to another
2. Players can develope from native A’s to a decent M or D by practice
3. If there is a stricter rule on vertical positioning in the future – we need
….a) DM, DA, MA
….b) some transition period (for teams like mine) to re-structure the squads (sells/buys), e.g. 1-2 seasons OR/AND immediately transformation to MA, DA, DM of the current players
—> DON’T THINK ABOUT PENALTIES FIRST, BUT ABOUT IMPROVEMENT
Personally, i agree that there should be dependencies of favoured position and played position.
But please don’t change every 1-2 seasons basics of the game engine, that’s exhausting. Sum up all featured that should be changed for some time and then … implement.
IN THIS CASE:
- Please don’t change the logic (penalties for wrong posiotions) within the next ticks, that’s unfair to all teams that play by the rules since then (and build their teams by this)
- Think about a transition to DM, MA, DA first … You have changed lately the sides attrbutes for all existing players
- Why don’t you implement now the MA, DA, DM attributes to the existing player ?!
—> Best case: Based on there their real skills … tac & pas>sho = D, M or DM, pas&sho>tac = M, A or MA
Cheers from Berlin
regarding the topic, what the plan to do on this right now?
in fast ticker again 3 good players were sold (without my supervision) – all to 1 club – a club from my league.
i’m still interested in a method to prevent those situations …
There is already a wage cap?
i doubt it:
Leixões in FastTicker
pays his players 1.600.000 !!! on wages weekly – 5 player above 100k, one above 200k …
Official decision criteria on Germany’s Bundesliga:
1. points
2. goal difference
3. number of goals scored
4. result on agregate (matches between the teams even)
5. number of away goals (in those matches)
6. number of all away goals over all
7. deciding game on neutral ground
What about money from TV increasing from QF in national cup and 2nd round in CL and UEFA etc.
What about a bonus when winning or being 2nd in cups and leagues
Why is merchadising not improving in relation to the team success? i had the same amount in the season 1, i have now after winning 3 times the league and 1x cup … that’s to improve.