Recent Posts
18,555 posts(s) found
Yeah, that top player thing should only apply to the top 3-5 players as determined by the board.
I did, but when you have lots of good players even those that are not among your best are great. That was the case. I’ve already returned the player to the team since the guy fired the player and left, which does not make any sense.
Why not just get CPU teams to loan players more frequently? A manager should only be allowed one team per game world. Also alot of smaller teams would loan players if money was involved, like a cash agreement of 1,000,000 etc over the full season..
Still there is alot of other things that need worked on before they get anywere near this part of the game.
the guy from tenerife put a great player( Angulo) on free! Gabriel I though that u made an ubgrade that the best players can’t be put on free ??!!
ok, it is not a big sale anymore. But two very good players are for sale …
a 92 tackler http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/101560
and a 93 passer http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/99814
again!!!
2 × 2
4-4-2 formation 3-3-4
64% possession 36%
43 shots 8
40 shots on target 6
90% accurrate passes 95%
87% effective tackles 27%
10 corners 1
3 offsides 9
2 fouls 7
The team who bought probably has a good amount of money to spend and if you compare him with the other attackers in the squad it wasn’t a bad acquisition after all, specially considering his age, which is 18. I know what you’re saying, cpu managed teams are not that smart on their buyings, but believe me, they were worse before :)
can anyone explain why some wreck players are being sold for “huge” prices? check this example:
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/128019
and i could give you some more
2 × 1
3-4-3 formação 4-3-3
44% posse de bola 56%
9 chutes 24
9 chutes a gol 21
85% passes certos 91%
49% roubadas efetivas 50%
2 escanteios 4
5 impedimentos 2
4 faltas 7
For SALE
Carmine Valcarenghi
Nationally: Italia
Club: Inter
Estimed Value: 2,231,299
Age: 30
Position: AM
Side: C
Shooting: 81
Speed: 87
Dribble: 81
Control: 91
Header: 85
Transfer Price: 15,000,000
Negotiable change price.
For SALE
Alessandro Rais
Nationally: Italia
Club: Inter
Estimed Value: 13,101,,875
Age: 31
Position: M
Side: RC
Passing: 97
Speed: 100
Dribble: 84
Control: 87
Header: 90
Transfer Price: 20,000,000
Negotiable change price.
player for sale
Angelo Deoma
Nationally: Italia
Club: Inter
Estimed Value: 13,348,329
Age: 30
Position: D
Side: C
Tackle: 100
Speed: 95
Dribble: 86
Control: 90
Header: 90
Transfer Price: 25,000,000
Negotiable change price.
We are not looking at this right now. I’ve tried to change it a while back but it turned out more complicated than I initially thought, so I postponed, but we will certainly go back to this problem.
Interesting suggestion, we can certainly foster the discussion around this idea.
Currently there is no relation between fitness and improvement.
Cheers.
it would be nice to get an update from the administrators about this… I know that it’s been discussed before but I would just like to know where it all stands…is there any way possible to avoid this
I think it could be nice if a human club can make a partnership with a BOT club as follow :
*you can select only one club partner per country maximum
*the club partner as to be in 2nd division (when the country has 2 divisions)
*you have to pay 1.000.000 per year per club which is/are your “satellite”
in exchange :
*you can decide the players you will loan to the club (the club partner will pay 0% of the salary)
*you can make offers/bids to the players of the BOT club who are not on the transfer list
Then
The partnership automatically finishes when :
*a human manager took the control of the club
*the BOT club is promoted to 1st division
*the “human club” is relegated to the 2nd division
*the “human club” did not pay the “BOT club”
*the “human club”’s manager resigns
Really I have 4 young players I would like to make play loaning them, and I would be also really pleased to pay one club to make them play. Wish this idea is possible to be realized!
força mourinho !!!
I would like to know if more the players are tired they improve less? and If yes what is the limit of fitness to not go under to keep a good potential of improving. thanks!
GO Inter .. Inter … Inter
Yeah, that sounds alot more reasonable. Maybe if it was something where in the loan options you could select bonus and opt to pay 10 or 20 % of the increase in value.
Not that you need more, but here:
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/match_report/793317
1 × 1
4-4-2 formation 5-2-3
59% possession 41%
24 shots 7
18 shots on target 5
93% accurrate passes 94%
69% effective tackles 27%
4 corners 2
6 offsides 3
3 fouls 7
Several good players available for loan at Napoli. Take a look at:
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/team_players/297
@Dhimitri: making the reward proportional to the player improvement changes things, now we can start considering this idea :D
I think this is a good idea.
Yes, but the loaner cannot decided who the loanee is a going to be, which diminishes the chances of cheating greatly. In addition, the “monetary reward” to a loanee for improving your player should proportional to the value increase, which again should keep things in check.
For starting managers, this could be a good way to get some cash.
I think he is not doing anything illegal. Not everyone is active in the free market. If someone is willing to buy a player with huge wage for some millions i assume they would offer similar when he is free….he is active in the game and thats the reward he gets so cant really blame him.
If theres someone to blame its not him but the guys who buy his high wage players…dont buy high wage players problem solved….
As Ulisses mentions, the concern would be that this would allow the passing of money between teams, potentially making it easier to cheat.
I am not a bayern supporter but i hope they trash inter in the cl final. Its sad that you can reach the final defending whole game with %25 ball possession….fuck mourinho arrogant piece of shit and their style of play!!!!