Recent Posts
18,535 posts(s) found
Gabriel, in my latest national team match in Fast the match report shows that Anibal Ribeiro played (http://rubysoccer.com/match/report/5909366). However, he is no longer part of my squad and was not a part during that match (as you can see we are in the middle of the WC, I cannot change the squad). Weird…
You now have an option to choose whether or not a scout search should become inactive when no players are found on completion. The default behaviour is to make them inactive and therefore all existing searches have been marked as such. If you want them to continue running in this situation just uncheck the box that says “Inactivate if no player found?” when creating new ones or editing existing ones.
Thanks Alexander for the suggestion.
Ah, got it! I’ll add an option for that in the search itself, turned off by default.
That’s what i would like to change – i would like the scout to restart using the same criteria even if the search doesn’t yield any results this time (hopefully he will the next time or the time after that :-) )
Scout searches can now also be completed using rubies. Bear in mind that there is no guarantee a player will be found, it all still depends on your search criteria. Similar to coach reports, the lower the progress of your scout search the higher the price: 3 rubies if current progress is between 0% and 33%, 2 rubies between 34% and 66% and 1 ruby if higher than 66%.
They already do, they are only made inactive if no players are found (in which case you probably want to change the criteria).
Hi guys
Would it be an idea to add an option to have scout searches run continuously, e.g. restart automatic after completion?
You can now use rubies to immediately complete coach reports: 2 rubies if the report progress is less than 50%, 1 ruby otherwise. As said before we don’t want RubySoccer to become pay-to-win. While early completion of coach reports provide you quicker insight on your players we do not deem it to be fundamental and decisive enough so that those not paying for it are unable to compete against those that are paying.
Ok :)
It just didn’t make sense as he was a young player sitting on the transfer list, I’ll just leave him behind on my bid for glory lol
He’s an explorer! He wants to get to know people from other countries, travel the world! I know, it may sound silly if you think about real life, but these restrictions are there to add something different to the transfer market. RubySoccer has many things that do not resemble real life. For example, we don’t have restrictions on number of foreigners in the squad, south american clubs would never have that many europeans playing in their squads.
I have “lost” a couple players due to the new rules as well. One of them wanted to play in a high ranked country and there was Paraguayan club bidding who was able to hire him with a lower salary. The other one wanted a lower ranked manager, so a smaller club with a new manager got him.
Anyway, it’s a recent change and we should give it a time to see whether or not it is a good one :-)
Hahahaha makes sense
Hi, I’m trying to buy a certain player but he won’t join as I’ve too many Spanish players in my team, I think this is silly as my team is Athletico Madrid! It’s a Spanish team and he’s a Spanish player so he shouldn’t have an issue?
Thanks for the detailed suggestions, it sounds really interesting! I’ll definitely consider all that is being discussed here as one of the next big changes :-D
Regarding the youth development ‘issue’, wouldn’t it be an idea to go for an additional investment area called ‘youth’?
In the first levels it could increase the effect of the investment in ‘coaching’ for younger players. Similar to what already has been mentioned as one of the options in this topic. This effect could increase until a maximum level that will be reached in level 4 for example. One of the questions here is if you should limit the effect to the age when players will reach their full potential (x% of potential reached) or to a fixed maximum age (21yr?).
From, for example, level 5 you could think of having a satellite club (similar to what many clubs have in real life) to stall some players.
From level 5 to 7 you’re bound to choose a second division club from an inactive country (then these leagues have also a function) where you can install 1, 2 or 3 players depending on your investment level. This player will then be placed here for a full season and cannot be used at all by your own team. The club of your choice can be selected in the first couple of turns of every new season (because of promotion/ relegation the clubs you can choose from will change each year). I like the idea of a payment per match, so the bigger clubs will bring money to these clubs, which enables them to become stronger as well. Depending on the coaching level of the satellite club, it might be more or less money that you’ll need to pay per match.
For all other youngster that stay at your squad, the effect of the investment will stay similar to what has been reached with level 4.
From level 8 to 10 you could think of having a first division club from an inactive country as a satellite club that will not play International matches. And again, from level 8 to 10 you could limit the number of players per level from 1 to max 3 players per year.
The interesting part here is that depending on the type and number of youngsters with potential in your squad and their need for development, you can play around with your investment level.
This solution secures us all that a least three potential players will have the option to develop to first division degree. At that time they’ll probably be interesting enough for many clubs for loan period for further improvements.
And for all other less talented players there’s still the option for a loan/ being sub from time to time or just training to develop themselves….
Still it makes sense that it takes time to develop talents and it can last several seasons before a player reaches his full potential.
To my opinion such an investment area should only have an additional a coaching effect on players until they’ve reached 90/95% of their full potential or are max. 25yr. Then the coaching investment should take take over.
(To make the solution more future proof, you could also think of a system where you can select a satellite club from countries that are ranked at least 5 places lower than your club’s country. In this case even active managers of less developed teams could send out a request to become a satellite club, when they are in need of money and some talented players.)
Agree about goalkeepers, maybe just for them I could extend the amount of improvement provided by training and reduce the amount provided by match experience.
I think a youth league would be a bad idea, sounds like a lot of extra effort for me.
The problem here is you don’t want to make developing players too easy. I have no problem developing them now, it take time but I’m fine with the current system apart from goalkeepers. They are difficult to improve as you don’t want to concede serious amounts of goals in official matches!
All you really have to do is sub on a young player with 30minutes remaining until he is good enough to loan out, simple.
Instead of my option 2 above (which I probably wouldn’t want to do anyway) we could have the following (thanks Samir):
2) You have an option to “send a player” to gain match experience (without using money) and, after x turns (depending on coaching requirements, coaching level and how much he still needs to play to improve), he improves. During this period the player would be unavailable to be used by your team and you could only send one player at a time to gain match experience. Obviously the number of turns that it takes to improve this way should be more than if you were actually using the player in your matches.
I’m still a bit unsure about a youth league and the complexity it adds to the game. I’ve been thinking of a few ideas to try and address this issue, what do you guys think about these:
1) Allow the team to pay a certain amount of money to simulate match experience for a player. This should work ONLY for simple “play matches” requirement, not for play abroad, play for division 1, etc. The exact amount will vary depending on player quality, minimum coaching level requirement for next step and this action should be limited to once (overall, not per player) every x turns (maybe 3?). For example, I could pay 100k to simulate match experience to one of my players that need to play official matches, then I will only be able to do it again (for any player) after x turns. Players need to play a few matches to improve, so I’d have to do this the same number of times for him to improve.
2) Extend number of times players improve by training so that match experience is not required until a bit later than what it is today.
3) Allow you to offer an amount of money in your loan clauses for each match the player is used by the team loaning him. For example, I could loan list a player offering 50k for each match he plays.
My preference is for option 1, it is the simplest to implement and tweak as needed. Actually option 2 is simpler to implement, but I think it will reduce too much the control we have over player improvement, it would mostly happen automatically. Option 3 is not bad either in my view, but it requires a bit more work to limit the amount that can be offered and also make CPU teams “aware” of the new rule so they can make use of it (loan players with this option when they need a bit of money).
Four new inactive clubs have been added to Argentina. As a result, the second division (properly renamed to Primera B Nacional) now has three relegation spots. Don’t forget you can see and vote for your favourite inactive clubs in EACH country by going to the Inactive Teams tab in the Country screen.
They are free. Your transfer budget may still show a lower value after the transfer because now the player’s wage is part of your fixed expenses, and that is taken into account when calculating how much you’re allowed to spend on transfers.
Just to make it clear (some people have asked me this before), the transfer budget is not something separate from your team’s money balance, it is just how much FROM the money balance you are allowed to spend on player transfers.
When you sign players from the free transfer list, do they still have to pay their transfer value or are they actually free?
There were some changes a couple months ago to make the profiles that make players reach full potential younger more frequent in the game, but it takes a few seasons as usual for this to make a real difference (old players will retire and the new generation will reach potential younger on average). I tend to agree with Dimitri so I was hoping this change could improve things, and maybe it will in a few more seasons. A youth league will take time to plan and develop anyway, so we can devote some time to it and keep evaluating how player development is playing out. This will be an interesting and important topic to keep alive for a few seasons to share our observations.
You need to reduce your investments and try to sell some players to start with. Also hire some free players either to use or re-sell later. When I joined Santos in FastTicker it had only 6M balance and 0 in investments, I had to immediately sell a few players and luckily the total wage was low so I wasn’t losing money when playing home. In a few seasons I had a decent amount of money to hire better players, but I suppose I was not even close to the richest teams in the Brazilian league…
So far I don’t share the experience that it’s too difficult to develop young players.It does often take a long time though.
Transfer budget now is 0. However I have 13M total budget which is regular. How is it possible to build a team like that?
I would say 20 for a youth league
What should be the maximum age in a youth league?
I’d be in favour of a youth/reserve league but where it is not too easy to develop players into stars as the current way makes it almost impossible to develop them into anything worthwhile.
Most youth players never make it but this is where we could try and develop them. Then you can either:
1) release/sell them on if they are not going to make the grade at your club
2) sell them on to the bigger clubs for money
3) keep them and they are the pride and joy of your team :)
Your budget will go down as your money goes down, or if your fixed expenses (wages + investments maintenance) go up. Doesn’t look like a bug (just had a quick look), but if you keep an eye on it and still feels that something is odd please let us know.
I started playing in mediumticker (Manchester City) again a season ago. At the moment I only select a squad because a lack of time.
Now I look at my transfer amount today and it’s only 203k. Some ticks ago it still was more than 1M. I know because I wanted to buy a player but hadn’t enough money.
Is this a bug or is there a reason for this decrease? My financial situation hasn’t changed much.