Recent Posts
18,557 posts(s) found
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.
Hi,
wondering if this is a new thing, but why are the players I want to buy, all signing a 1 year contract and preventing me from buying them?
I know I need to wait 72 turns, which I did. I tried to buy, denied, I shoulda offered more I guess. Then a few turns later, they screw me buy signing a 1 year contract, even thought they had a year or more left on their existing contract.
Is this a thing now?
Yes, Modena put their strikers in M +1 positions and win most of the time.
I beat them 3 to 2, and 1 of their goals was from a Liverpool player loaned to them.
Good to hear that x)
Good luck!
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!
Is there any chance to add new league to RubySoccer?
I’m dreaming about Polish Ekstraklasa league. Maybe creators could be replace Polish league instead Belgian or Swedish league? ;)
Luke “Bronson”
Nice joke ;)
Congratulations! Modena plays with no strikers! Crazy.
Hi there.
Would it be possible to transfer my team to another country?
I would like to play in the Premier League since it has more human players and would make the game more exciting.
It would be great to have that done before the championship starts again (medium ticker).
Thanks.
Congrats!
Hoping Liverpool can have an even better luck tomorrow, on real-life CL!
Great job! Congrats!
You may also thank your goalkeeper but the shot efficiency of Barreto made the difference.
Next season you can concentrate on making your team stronger to compete with a giant like Bristol.
Good luck!
Liverpool achieved its greatest victory in recent history by winning the Euro League.
Despite an unorthodox approach, the opposition dominated shots on goal, but Liverpool put in 3 goals to win in regulation.
Barreto’s hat-trick will long be remembered as the greatest club game in the modern era. Whilst we all celebrate now, we look forward to improving our league record next season.
From: The Board
Subject: Champions!
We have won the Europa League. We are extremely pleased with the title! Well done
Gilmar & Ruano are also gone. Now for the sales of the week:
Raimondo Romanini – kpg 94, spe 97, avg 90, italian national
Alfredo Simones – tac 93, pas 83, avg 87
Check them out!
http://rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/791934
http://rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/860937
I only ask because I looked at Modena.
Their formation is what i described and they have Won nearly every game using their attackers in the midfield.
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.
My understanding is that a player loses 3 points in every skill if playing out of position. If he is playing as -1, 0 or +1 is indifferent
Of course, if a player has 2 possible positions (DA, DM or MA) he can play in either without any penalty
A penalty also applies to sides (L, C, R), but if I recall correctly the penalty increases (1, 2, 3 points) the further from the original side the player is. Again, there are players with 2 potential sides (LR, LC, RC)
Hi,
I am just wondering how a player is penalised when they are used in the wrong position?
For example, in a 5-5-0 formation, where all the Attackers are in M/+1 rather than in A/-1 ?
Thanks,
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 :-)
Hi, after all the free transfers lately I notice teams are just giving average C/B class players 200k a week to get them into their clubs. If the player isn’t deemed good enough he can be sold on for 20+ million to computer teams. This needs addressed so everyone can give a fair wage they believe to appropriate.
No club should want to buy a B player with 200k a week wages.
I’m fine having player class on profiles but when I’m looking for players I don’t look at class! Just abilities.
Thanks :)
Really? I thought you’d like this one :-D
I’ll add an option, no worries!
Can I have an option to remove player class from transfer list please? It’s taking my focus off the attributes and onto their class only.
Muller and West were already sold, now it’s time for Gilmar Rinaldi and Marc Ruano
Gilmar – Kpg 93, spe 92
Ruano – Tac 100
Both players under 30 years old, with good attributes, and still improving their skills!
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.
Is it currently only possible to loan players to B class clubs? They were the only ones interested in my player so far (that I have put on the loan list something like eight times).
Sounds good to me, 6 turns should be ok.
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?
Hi all,
From long time I’m trying to buy good striker by forced transfer. My club budget is small so I don’t want spend too much money.
So in this situation, my suggestion is follows:
Could we add in our Scouting system “suggested forced transfer amount” option?
Then after a few ticks of scouting, managers would be get valuable raport:
“To buy this player, we should try to offer 15-20M $” etc.
Higher lvl of scouting = more correct suggestion in raport.
Best regards,
Luke “Bronson”