Recent Posts by Ricardo Costa
130 posts(s) found
Players should choose money, team importance, and the opportunity they will have to be a 1st team regular.
At least this is the way i see it in real life.
I will not even try to begin talking about the mythic wage cap, seeing as players went for 200k+ this season, if it exists it obviously isn’t working properly.
Well, where is the money going then? ;)
I think it should stay the same except in particular cases, like the one mentioned by Jorge. In those kind of cases, i think Jorge should support 100% of the player’s wages.
Cheers.
Cool, thought i was the only one. :)
Also, as it is now, players can stay in the same team forever. I don’t think that’s realistic, except in some very particular cases. That way, when you have a good player you will never let him leave, except when he gets too old or when he retires. I think there should be a limit of years for the player to stay there (like 6-8 years, or 2-3 contracts), and after that he would refuse to sign a new contract, saying he wanted a new challenge.
Maybe that could be done around the club’s success or lack of it. A player is supposed to feel good when he gets to play most of the matches and wins trophies. But even if they play a lot, if they never win anything, and if they feel like they’re way better than the rest of their teammates, they feel like they can do better and start looking for ways to improve their career.
Still on the previous matter, the wages, if first team players started to feel unhappy (therefore playing worse) because someone came to the club earning a lot more than they did, and asked for more money (similar to what their new mate is earning) to become happy again, i think it would make people think twice before offering crazy amounts of money, because it would mean that sooner or later they would have to pay the same to at least 7 or 8 of their first team players.
I must say i’m really happy to see that wage rising is the current problem with Rubysoccer, economy problems just show us how much the game has evolved since its first release. :)
Wages are rising this fast because there are tons of millions that people just don’t know what to do with. Money has no real value if there’s no place to spend it, except on wages. Having 500.000 every home match, we can pay 250.000 in wages and have a balanced economy. 250.000 is an average 20k to each first squad player, and considering that sometimes we get “cheap” youths from the academy, it isn’t hard to pay 60 or 70k to a better player that you see on the free transfer list.
We need to take money out of the game in any possible way. Giving dividends to shareholders at the beginning of each season (20% of the club’s total, FM style maybe), reducing the tickets to half their price (or making it user-defined, like i suggested in the blog days), stadium expansion (but not Managersim style, something that costs moreor we’ll get to Fulltest problems where a dozen of teams reached 100k seaters and there was no way to fight their economic capacity), and academy investment (where the amount of money you invested would have a word in the quality of the youths you’d get, but not something like “pay 500k every week and you’ll get hundreds of good players”, just improve the chances of getting good youths, instead of 1 good every 20 that get promoted, make it 3 or 4… as the number of them, make it from 6 to 12 like in Managersim) are good ways to take money off the game. I liked the “Agent fee” option that was included in Challenge 2, but i’m aware that it wasn’t something that everyone agreed on.
Cheers.
I’d like to see it running both at the same time, i’m just not sure how i’d like to see it done lol.
I’m not sure how many rounds there are in each cup, and right now i keep getting an error while trying to log in so i can’t check it out, but let’s say it’s 6… we could have something like this:
Week 1 – NC L1
Week 2 – NC L2
Week 3 – R
Week 4 – IC L1
Week 5 – IC L2
Week 6 – R
NC – National Cup
IC – International Cup
L1-L2 – 1st and 2nd Leg
R – Rest
With each round taking 6 weeks, in 36 weeks both cups would end, *3 turns it means 108 turns out of 144 possible. If we take out the 1st and last month of the season (well, there aren’t matches then anyway), we have it running through 108 out of 120 ticks, which is pratically the whole season. Take a 1 month break in the middle of the season and we have 108 out of 108. :)
How does that sound? We could have 2 weeks of rest instead of taking out months, but that would mean we’d only play for each cup every 2 months…
Cheers. :)
I’m not sure if this has been adressed before, if so i missed it, sorry. :)
Is there any compensation to the team who has a loaned player if the owner recalls him?
For example, team A loans a player to team B for 100 ticks, with team B paying 1000 weekly wage. If at tick 50 team A decided to recall the player, i think it would be fair if they had to compensate team B with what they would pay in wages until the end of the loan period, in this case 50000 (1000*50ticks). Or maybe it could be stipulated when the loan deal was made.
I really miss contract clauses… :)
Is there a time limit for keeping track of these things? I have a couple of friends playing RS, never tried to trade with them because i’m aware we wouldn’t be able to… but the only time i logged on their pc (or them in mine) was still in Beta 1. I think 1 or 2 months with this restriction would be enough to prevent cheating.
Cheers. :)
The flags look nice, but we also need them in the International cups screen. :)
Bankrupcy is imho clearly the first one! :)
The next could be objectives, have the board ask you for a specific league place, comparing your squad with the rest of your league. Something like “Win the title”, where you’d have to at least stay on the top 3, “Among the top” for at least 7th or 8th, or lets say international cups, “Middle in Table” for 7th-14th and “Avoid Relegation” for… guess! ;)
Cheers.
That would work, Samir… for now. Once we are able to make our own offers instead of just bidding what the selling team is asking, that would spoil the fun of waiting for the final minute of the final tick to raise your offer and become the highest bidder, therefore negotiating alone. ;)
I think it should always close 3 turns after the first bid comes in, to prevent what Philipp is saying. In that case, if player X is listed for 20M, there must be a bid of 20M… and if at 2,95 turns the seller lowers it to 1M, the bidding team will still have to pay the 20M, or drop that bid and make a new one of 1M, restarting the 3 turn count (assuming he was the only one bidding, so the player wouldn’t have any bid when he dropped the 20M one).
Hope i made any sense on this lol
Another thing… 6 turns could be the default before the bids close, and the manager could have the option to change that from 3 to 9, similar to what we had in SS, it could go from 1 week to… not sure, never tried the most of it, but we could at least 1 month.
Cheers.
Ouch, missed that one. Thanks :)
What’s wrong with Stuttgart in FastTicker? They have 7 matches, 7 wins and 12 points.
Cheers.
Yep, its fine now :)
Hi, i keep getting a “Oops! It looks like there was an error.” everytime i try to enter Fast Ticker. Im probably the only one, as i see there are 13 guys in there. Can you try to figure out what’s wrong with me please? Thanks.
RS keeps getting better and better! Thanks!! :)
In SS after they turned 19 they would never (ok, VERY rarely) improve another single point, and i used to find that really annoying.
I’m liking this new system, but it’s a lot harder to tell if a player is going to be good or not. I think they could maybe develop a bit faster in the beginning, until they reached high 70s/low 80’s. Aside from that, the system looks pretty nice. :)
I thought the board wasn’t allowing high wages anymore… but it must be a very high limit. I just saw a 400k estimated value player going from the free transfer list on a 32k wage. Either what the board allows must be lower, or there has to be some kind of action when the club’s balance goes negative, because we keep seeing this from the same managers, managers who have tons of players on their squad… it’s kinda unfair for the ones who try to play as all should, worrying about the finances.
Cheers
Agreed, good idea. Would be very useful when choosing the MOs.
So, stamina has changed?
If i followed it correctly, instead of 4(L)ost -3(G)ained we now have 3L-2G?
Souds better, to be honest 4L-3G made it a bit too easy. :)
Sounds great!
My suggestion would be to gradually decrease the player’s improvement time. Something like having a stat boost over the first 5-6 matches, then make him play like 5-10 matches to gain another stat, and on a third phase gain stats after each 15 match or so… but only on the ones that are born to be stars.
Thanks Gabriel, lets see how it works. :)
Excellent, thanks! :)
Not sure if this is already covered, but probably not as it is only a matter of adding “/forums”.
The “back to rubysoccer forums” link on the bottom of a thread is refering to http://www.rubysoccer.com instead of http://www.rubysoccer.com/forums
Cheers. :)
I think that would work, Toni.
Or having both methods, allowing the manager to choose which one he prefered best, like an option in his profile.
Gabriel, if it really is hard to implement then put it on hold. I have absolutely no idea how it is done, i thought it would be something simple like having a “Y/N” boolean, where a player could get a Y every time he played and a N every time he didn’t. If on Y the stamina deduction variable would have the value of 2, and when on N it would add 1 to that variable, starting the process all over again when the boolean got back to Y.
But like i said, i have no idea if this makes any sense in Ruby language.
On one hand i like it, and with the tick next to it my “complaint” about not knowing how many ticks left to next match is worked out. :)
On the other hand, the suspense of clicking the mail box and the news with the match result is gone, everything is there once you log in.
Well, i think i can live with that, its more useful the info than the suspense. :)
I think that recovering 3 instead of 2 would be better than it is now, at least more realistic. Getting to the next match with the exact same amount of stamina that he had in the previous one is something like this: You have a player that only plays league matches. Between fixture 1 and 2 he played a friendly match, causing his stamina to fall to 96. He stays that way (having 96 on the match day) until the end of the season, which means that by fixture 38 he will still be suffering fatigue from a match he played almost 1 year ago. ;)