Recent Posts by Dimitri
639 posts(s) found
It’s explained in the wiki: http://www.rubysoccer.com/mediawiki/index.php/Players_Skills
Your DL will have -1 if he plays at DC. If he plays (next game) at DL (or DLC) he doesn’t get skill penalties.
PSV is selling:
Bibero, 26 yr, D RC, 45M (same as value)
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/240313
Alan Lee, 19 yr, M C, 20M (value 12M)
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/295242
Tomé Porto, 20yr, A LC, 23m (value 18.5M)
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/285989
Peter Post, 20yr, A C, 23M (value 16.5M)
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/289250
Each season, the average size of stadiums in a league is higher (assuming that there are teams paying to expand the stadium). This also means that normally the average attendance is higher. This means that the average income is higher.
There you have your inflation!
Ah, wait, there isn’t. It’s still 3 minimum, but if you look during a tick, it will be 1!
Right?
There has been a slight change, hasn’t there? I saw players with 1 stamina, while in the past I think 3 was the minimum.
Same for MediumTicker I guess.
I had something like that too. It was fixed after I posted about it, probably they will this time too when they see it.
Well, it’s a request. You can get yes or no as an answer (most of the time it will be no).
“This would then force managers to sell players at a more realistic price”
Managers are selling for the prices cpu teams are willing to pay. If those prices are not realistic, shouldn’t the cpu teams bidding behaviour be fixed?
Yes, that seems to be a good strat right now.
No, default is always the default formation for every game. If you want to use another formation for a game, you have to select that one.
If you have several invitations, you can use the ‘accept all’ feature (and select ‘friendly1’ for all).
Ok, let’s suppose we remove player value. A cpu team needs a MR. There is one on the market for 80M. Should the cpu team buy the player?
The player value is based on actual transfers, right? But the cpu teams are paying twice or more the player value. Which means player values go up. Which means cpu teams will pay even higher prices, etc.
I still don’t understand why it isn’t possible to have a middle way between cpu teams hardly buying players, and cpu teams spending too much money…
If CPU teams don’t pay more than the estimated value for players, would that make the market better?
Yes. You can check it for yourself: each 15 friendly matches there should be skill improvements for your players (with coaching level 10).
There’s no correlation between stamina and improvement. It is quite common to have young players at 3 stamina (by letting them play all friendlies).
However, if you want to loan a player out, it is better to have them at high stamina (assuming that cpu teams take this factor in account for player selection)
In Rubysoccer players can develop when they are 28 (if they haven’t fully developed before), but normally it stops on age 25 or 26.
(At least, I have understood that from prior postings and from experience).
If you like to play CL this season, apply for NEC or Cambuur! They finished 2nd and 3rd last season in The Netherlands. NEC has a striker with 99 shooting…
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/team_info/641
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/team_info/654
Season 67 gave another convincing title for De Graafschap. With 16 points ahead they were clearly the strongest team. Not many human managers made the top 6 unfortunately: with a 5th place PSV was the only other one. Ajax even relegated, hopefully they will be back soon.
In Europe there was a decent showing by the Dutch teams, enough to stay 7th in the rankings. A bit frustrating for me though that (not for the first time) 10 points was not enough for PSV to get through the group phase of the CL…
I finally sold a player! :)
But I thought players of 24/25 years are still supposed to develop (if they play matches). Am I wrong in that?
Has it changed? My players are not developing as expected…
Well done Henk, it took some time, but you finally made it to the top :)
And it’s nice we gained some places in the ranking, though the differences are very small.
Computer says no.
Yes, it seems that it is only possible to have cpu teams buy lots of players for too high prices, or to have them not buy anything at all, even at the cheapest price possible. A middle way would be nice.
The same bug as http://www.rubysoccer.com/forums/2/topics/2119 perhaps?
Season 65 was a strange one, with a lot of clubs having winning and losing streaks. Defending champion PSV had a bad season and only just managed to qualify for European football. The number 17 of two seasons ago, Haarlem, managed to win both the league and the cup this year. Computer teams took place two and three while De Graafschap took the important sixth place just before AGOVV.
But next season everything might be totally different..
Maybe you can repost it at http://www.rubysoccer.com/forums/3 as a suggestion Molinari?
I think I get it: you made your bid because of your obsession with player value.
Just don’t do it again.
I don’t think you understand the problem. It has nothing to do with player value: it has to do with the transfer price. It’s ok to bid a bit less than the transfer price. A bit less than 25% of the transfer price is either stupid or just to annoy. And I saw you did bids like that more often…