Recent Posts by Gabriel Cesario
4,200 posts(s) found
- rate over 8.5 in games to build points towards the next class
not towards next class, this is to build points towards earning stars
- have hidden attributes
yes, only influencing the minimum rating required for each star level
- be the best at their position for your end of season calculations
stars are not influenced by the position (except goalkeepers who are slightly less likely to get them)
- not have many other stars in your nation
a specific number of stars is distributed per country, so your players are only compared to those playing in the same country in order to get stars
Stars are mostly based on player ratings, but it is not as simple as taking the average rating. Each star type (gold, silver and bronze) has a minimum rating associated with it, every time the player achieves that minimum during a match he earns some points towards that star level. In addition to that, each player has a natural tendency towards or against stars (some are neutral) that is hidden, which will make it easier or harder for them to get stars. In summary, stars are associated by top ratings in matches (think 8.5+ in most cases) affected by the player’s natural star tendency.
For each country there is a maximum number of stars to be distributed for each level. Higher ranked countries will have more star players. That means that star distribution is a relative comparison on players performance in a country for the previous season. A star player will lose no more than one star level per season, even if he doesn’t player any matches.
Now, class S players. Every season we automatically re-calibrate the way the game evaluates how good a player is, and then for each dimension we’ll find out what is the highest skilled player for the current parameters, that is our top number for class A players. When a player has stars, those stars will artificially increase the player skills for class purposes, which means they can make a B player become an A player or an A player become an S player. Another way to have an S player is if you had an A player whose skills were very close to the pre-determined maximum on season start that then surpasses it by improving during the season, then he can become an S player even without any stars.
Sorry for the long post, I thought these things deserved a proper explanation!
Countries which have inactive teams end up having extra players in comparison to the other countries, as a new batch of players joins the game every time teams become active again. In order to balance that roughly 50% of the players generated for re-activated teams will be from countries other than the team’s country.
I like the board % idea, not hard to put in practice.
I’ve been burned with “more likely to get injured” before…had a great player that was always getting injured, either during training or matches.
That trait is really annoying :-)
I’ve been thinking if some players should randomly not have a negative trait and some others no trait at all.
It works the same way as non-human managed teams, except that the amount required to successfully force the transfer is doubled. The manager has no say in it, which may indeed make some people angry. We only had two instances (I think) of forced transfers involving a human managed team as the target.
What is the general opinion, should we block this option altogether so that you can’t target a player from a human managed team? Should we allow it but change the rules for it? Or leave it as is?
Please like our new Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/goalfcteam
Your coach reports for potential and next step will now be more specific when your player has already reached his potential. There is no pointing in hiding this information or making it subjective.
After the last league match, the following will happen to a team which has been relegated from the bottom league of a country:
- Any friendlies scheduled for the remainder of the season will get cancelled
- The manager will be fired
- The team will not accept any job applications
- All players will be transfer listed with a waiting period of 6 turns for the transfer to be concluded
The last item is the real change here. Currently the players from inactive teams are released for free throughout the season, which became an easy source of money for the already richer teams. By selling the players instead of making them available for free we reduce this advantage. Any players not sold before the season tick will still be released for free at some point in the following season.
Interesting, so it’s something specific to your Firefox…have you noticed whether or not you have https in the address? Like this: https://goalfc.net
That’s really bad! What still puzzles me is that nobody else has reported this, and we have other users in the region. I’m in Australia and constantly in touch with people from Brazil who play the game and I’m sure we’ve accessed the game at the corresponding time in our time zones without any issues.
We’ll see if there is anything more we can find out about this, please keep us posted if anything changes for you, good or bad.
Wow, surprised to hear that too! You’re the first one reporting such instability, the game has been up as usual since the change, the only instability reported was on the first day of the migration.
I second Joseppi’s question, which browser are you using? Which OS? What time of day you’re having issues? Do you get any errors or just can’t access the page?
Since mid-May no new players will have that profile, it is indeed a bit frustrating. On a positive note usually the last few improvements will give less points than the initial ones, so you should have your player in a reasonably good shape before his 30s.
Fixed!
Sure thing, thanks for letting us know. Hopefully it is similar to the issue we had on the squad positioning screen.
The fix for this is going live in 5 minutes.
Thanks Charles, we’ll look into it.
This should now be fixed, please let us know otherwise.
Apologies for the bad timing Bronson, I think we were too excited to do this change and didn’t want to wait any longer. It may look like a small thing but hopefully it’s just the first of many steps to take RubyS…I mean Goal FC to greatness.
Interesting, it shouldn’t be the case as the code and database structure is the same regardless of using mobile or not, but we will have to investigate.
Really? Nothing has changed in that area since then…weird. The only updates were to underlying software and infrastructure, nothing recent in the game code.
I assume you are talking about forced transfers, right? The behaviour you described has been there since the inception of this feature. Every time a forced transfer attempt fails the player contract gets renewed.
This is done to avoid multiple attempts to the same player with an increasingly higher offer until the right price is found. I know each manager has to wait 6 turns for a new attempt, but you could easily team up with others to force transfer players together, and that’s what we are trying to prevent.
Definitely in our plans to add more leagues, but first we will set up the game for growth. We have more ambitious plans this year, let’s see how much we can accomplish!
Fabio got the numbers right, I just wanted to add that if you play an attacker at M+1 and give him instructions to move forward when with/without the ball he’ll be effectively playing as A-1, and while he is there there will be no penalties. For example if you only tell him move forward when with the ball he will be penalised only when the opponent has the ball.
When you are trying to hire players from the market you will not get the “not interested” messages anymore, they will always listen to your offer first. Similarly we have removed the exclusive negotiation (priority indicator) when one or some teams had exclusive offer evaluation by some players and could sometimes win disputes with very low salaries.
Both these things were based on the player negotiation priority profile, which is still in place and will have a weight in the player decision, but now we have removed the two extremes where the player either completely ignores a team/manager or gives him exclusivity.
Yep, I have done the same in the past and I agree it is not good for the game. I mean, financially it is kind of ok but the behaviour itself is not exactly how we intend the player market to work. Wage disputes and a better control of the amount of money in the hands of managed teams are two topics that I’ve been thinking a lot about lately.
With regards to wage disputes in player negotiations, currently the base factor for the player decision is how much you are offering compared to how much he would like to receive. From there we apply all the other factors, such as the player negotiation priority bonus, star player bonus, etc. So for example, if the player wants 30k and your offer is 45k, you start with a 1.5 “strength” to your offer. One of the crazy ideas I had was to change the base factor to be the amount you offered compared to the maximum your board allows you to offer. For example, if you offered 50k and your board allowed 100k, your “strength” is 0.5, whereas if another club offers 30k and the board only allowed 45k it already starts at 0.75, ahead of you! Of course, this is assuming 30k is acceptable for the player. I know, very controversial but it takes into the account the “sacrifice” a smaller team could be making to have the player, and also a bigger team would usually have more bonuses on top of the base strength, so even in the example of 0.5 × 0.75 after all the bonuses the first offer could still prevail.
Regarding controlling the amount of money in the game (with managed teams) we have some very interesting ideas where CPU teams could start selling decent players for large sums if there are too many clubs with a lot of money (meaning they have nowhere to spend) or they could start looking at buying players from less rich managed teams first (if they can find suitable options, of course). This is just the tip of the iceberg on these ideas because I don’t want to say too much on how this would work.
All this is going to take some time, I’m taking some time off very soon and won’t be doing any changes to the game for a few weeks :-)
Really? I thought you’d like this one :-D
I’ll add an option, no worries!
Updated player evolution profiles so that:
- no new players will be generated with “reaches potential on his 30s”
- introduced new “reaches potential very young”
- adjusted age for “reaches potential while still young”
- adjusted number of available improvements per season to be smoother and always have a minimum of 2
- removed the scenario where a player had no improvements available in a given season even before reaching potential
- reduced some differences in number of improvements for different profiles
- players can start losing skills at 30, 31, 32 or 33 depending on profile (the older he is capable of reaching the potential the older he will start losing skills)
The main goal here is to improve the number of world class younger players, currently players over 30 dominate the top player lists all over the world. This should also make it faster to renew your squad when the time comes. These changes are effective for newly generated players only, existing players will retain their current profiles.
Not at all. Each different club class (when CPU controlled) will prioritise loans, first team players and future players in different orders. B clubs if I’m not mistaken would prioritise future players, then loans, then first team players. E and F should be prioritising loans.
Some time ago I was thinking of using the Negotiations level to provide a forced transfer price suggestion when attempting to do a forced transfer, similar to the way we have the suggested wage. In this case, however, as soon as you see the suggestion for a given player you would need to wait another 6 turns to see the suggestion again. How does that sound?