Recent Posts
18,555 posts(s) found
Hugo Correia , 20 years old
Sampdoria GSeite: -
Halten: 90
Zweikampf: 28
Passen: 72
Schuss: 29
Schnelligkeit: 84
Dribbling: 75
Kontrolle: 80
Kopfball: 80
Agressivität: 79
Ausdauer: 100
Make your bids.
This sounds very interesting indeed. No more loaning out great youngsters only to be placed on the bench. When can we expect this feature to be implemented?
those are astronomical at the moment for me :)
Player History Show All Previous Next
Season Turn Value Event
20
66 150000000 Transfered from Avaí to América-RN
for Danilo Viana
my record ;)
read above… Hopjes votes NO aswell :)
sponsors are not the only way for income… there are other sources too… :) any way… that question of mine was just for fun, but then.
regarding real life, look at spurs and new castle … ( new castle’s problem for next year is not due to wins/loss, it is a different story)…
Voting is fine, there is nothing decided yet :)
We plan to have a formal system for voting important change like that, but for now we’ll have to use the forums.
So far Parag and Philipp vote YES and Sly votes NO.
Let’s have a vote, since I really don’t like the age idea. I’m ok with the acadamy thing, but after that it should be fair game. I think it’s nice to see a 21-23 year old player increase. It gives more chances to smaller teams to get decent players. This has 1 simple reason. If you know a player will increase more or is more likely to increase from 17-20, those players will never be sold or found anywhere. And if they are sold it’s unlikely they will be cheap and affordable for the smaller teams. In the current way it’s possible a superstar is being missed because he’s 22 but never really played any real matches. Managers could mistake his age for a player that is “done” increasing. This gives way to a smaller team to pick up this player for a decent price and later find out he got a superstar in the rough. PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS CHANGE! I truly think it’s a bad idea and will give a negatice spinoff for smaller teams!
thanks gabriel… that would be good.
welcome back gabriel…
i am fine with what you and philipp have said… in fact i like the idea.
good ideas, hope for change. But i think it will be good to reduce value of players to a maximum of 100 mill. i´m tired to search the transfer list and see player for sale with crazy price tags, what in some case means that not interest on selling him. Now i just will place player on transfer list for max value than is more than 2k mill …..yes stupid but….
mucha suerte
damago
I’m working exactly on loan clauses! You’ll be able to set the minimum coaching level desired and the maximum number of official matches your player can miss. If the other team fails to meet the coaching clause it will not be able to loan your player. If he meets the clause but downgrades the coaching department below the minimum level afterwards, the player will return to your team. The same happens if he misses more official matches than he was allowed to.
I’m back!
You’re right Parag, you’ve read it somewhere. There is nothing implemented yet so I didn’t forget to tell you anything this time, Danilo ;)
What I plan to do is, as Parag said, give other players some kind of bonus when elder players are in the field. Not sure how it will work yet, I’ll post something about it when I start implementing.
Cheers!
Hello everybody, just got back from my trip :)
I like Philipp’s percentages, sounds reasonable. Currently what we have is around 20% for each season on youth academy and around 10% in the following seasons. So we could have 3 different scenarios:
-youth player leaves academy on 16: he will have 20% when he is 16 and 10% in the following years – reaches maximum with 24 years old
-youth player leaves academy on 17: he will have 20% when he is 16 and 17, and 10% in the following years – reaches maximum with 23 years old
-youth player leaves academy on 18: he will have 20% when he is 16, 17 and 18, and 10% in the following years – reaches maximum with 22 years old
If we change to age-based instead of youth academy based we could give around 15% of potential per season until 19 years old (and the player would earn 1.5 times the regular amount of experience points from matches), so when he turns 20 we’d have around 60% of his potential already given. For the following seasons the player receives around 10% of his potential per season, reaching his maximum from 23 to 24 years old, in the average.
to underline my opinion of a higher improvement in the first years i’d like to do an example:
- a 16yro youth starts in your academy with 70 in shooting
- let’s say he has 20 points potential (at the end he’d be 90 in sho)
- with training, friendlies and some official matches he improves 60% of his potential in the first 4 years: with 20yro he would have 82 in shooting
- the last 40% potential points he earns in the next 4-6 years (24-26yro)
- exceptions (~1-10% of all generated players) from the norm could be: reversed improved (strong improvement when gets older), improvement till 30 yro, no improvement after 20yro, etc …
in summary: that’s not too much improvement in the first years, but they still would reach a decent skill level to support a minor club etc. – isn’t that more realistic?
well… sly, thats just my opinion… i am not going for a personal battle out here… it should be more of consensus… let other players raise their voices too… if everyone agrees with you, i don’t have any problem with that…. but it seemed logical for me that younger players improve faster than the established ones, like they do in real life. nothing more to say in this post from my side :)
cheers…
well that’s good! That was the point of the entire youth system change! There are to many superstars right? Well…. let things go as they go now and this will deffinately happen. Problems solved…..
Hopjes, we are not saying lets improve younger players astronomically. What we are saying is, let the players improve more than they are doing currently, especially when they are in their teenage. if you calculate properly, that period is only around 3 to 4 seasons from 16 yrs to 19 yrs.
If this is not the case then, no one will develop youngsters, mangers will continue investing in well grown players, which means after some seasons, we will run short of players to replace the current ones. And watch this space, at that time everyone will demand the same thing that i am asking right now…
Sorry Parag, I’m not agreeing with you. You say “improving players is much more fun”. Well that’s your opinion :). I think both things can be enjoyable. It’s nice to see a young talents grow, but it’s also nice to find just that right player for just that right price who some how got missed by all these other big teams. Also you say “otherwise I don’t see how litte lower ranked teams can improve”. Please…..I won the league in my 3rd season with a team that just got promoted. I made it to the semi finals in the UEFA cup and the year after I held my own in CL vs some of the big teams out there like Benfica and Getafe. Last season even Lyon WON THE UEFA CUP!. This shows you don’t need the best players to do well. Those tactics are there for a reason Parag. I say keep things as they are now. Don’t forget when it comes to talent there is a fair amount of luck involved. You will never really know if a player will get very good or not.
Hey that’s my guy ;)
I personally think it’s a good thing they grow much slower. This will make the game more realistic, since sometimes players do get better at a higher age and sometimes talent gets wasted. Also economically this could get things more stable.
I’m experimenting with the youths for myself now, I’ve stopped hiring other players except for my own academy.
So Sylvain I’ll back you up.
i don’t agree with sly. improving players is much more fun than buying a well established.
if the idea proposed by danilo goes ahead, then, we could go and buy some players aged 17/18 on the free transfers list and develop them to good players. That way teams on with less funds and on the lower end of the table could get more chances of upsetting a well established teams. otherwise i don’t see how the lower ranked teams can improve.
currently there are so many players on free transfers list who will never be given any contracts, who knows things may change. but this should not happen to players who are above 19. (teenage should be the maximum limit)…
For e.g. i bought this player Geoffrey Tesson on free transfer last season as a 17 years old . He has already improved 13 points in around 75 turns. at the same time his main skill has gone from 79 to 82 which is decent for a 18 year old lad. Now, if someone thinks buying players on free transfers is cheating (as i have read some posts) then, so be it. but then with my team income being lower, i only have one way to go forward. and it only natural that player improve more when they are teenager. now if anyone sees anything wrong with that, then it is because they want to have their monopoly in the league.
By the way, please let us know (using the forum or our email – admins at rubysoccer) everytime this happens. It will go back to normal much faster if we interfere.
cheers!
I don’t agree…. it will create a lame spinoff effect that it will be harder and harder to sell people above 20 year old players. I think it’s nice to see 21 or 22 year olds suddenly increase greatly. I’m not likeing this idea at all….
I don’t think you can. Logical right…if you are a team in real life and you don’t win, why would sponsers be intrested in sponsering you. The sponsers want to be ascociated with a winning team, not a losing team :)
It may happen sometimes. It should be ok now.
cheers!
Is it just me, or is the site really slow today? I’m getting really long and annoying load times. Do other people have this aswell or is it just me?
i think managers should have the luxury of deciding the selecting the team to which they should loan out their players to…
Today i was forced to do what i would never do while selling a player or which i think is not good thing for a team manager to do…
The coaching dept at the team which wants to loan my player is at zero ( 0 ). And my 18 year old lad has a very good future considering he is already at 82 on his main skill… so, i didn’t want him to go there as he would take more time to reach his maximum.
So, i sent him a message asking him to improve his dept before i could load one of my prized assets out to him. then i had no choice but to remove his from the list.
what is the best way to increase sponsors income, especially when wins are difficult to come by???
i would love that… this is an even better idea…
Ah thanks a lot ! Of course, there should be a chance that attackers with higher control will be able to play one-touch ! I appreciate your time and work ! Waiting for the tweaks to come ;)