Recent Posts by Gabriel Cesario
4,200 posts(s) found
It should be fixed by now, apart from a weird match on turn 95. It was my fault, obviously. While fixing Libertadores and Sudamericana yesterday I accidentally started the generation of groups for CL again but I thought I stopped it on time. At least the matches for the wrong groups were not generated.
Sorry for that guys ;-)
Fixed!
I’ve just arrived at home…is it progressing at least? I see 80% now.
The percentage drop is based on your opponent, so if you lost to a theoretically much weaker team (that probably has already exceed its expectations) your performance will decrease a lot, like it did. The expectation is just an indication of how your team compare to others in the same competition :-)
You guys got it right, they raised the price so nobody would interfere. They contacted me in-game about this trade :-)
Probably not…we have players in many different timezones so the tick times will always be good for some and bad for others…of course we can change if most feel the current schedule is not good :-)
Scheduled FastTicker update to 2 hours from now…MediumTicker 8 hours from now.
It is kinda crazy right now…I may have an idea of what is going on, but I’m at work now with no access to RubySoccer server, I’ll check this out when I get home (I’ll email Danilo just in case he has time to look at it before I do). I’ll postpone the ticks until this is resolved.
Did we just “skipped” one tick, I mean had two tick consecutively and now things are back to normal but with a new “schedule”?
Hey everybody! What’s going on? I haven’t checked yet :D
It’s Monday morning here (7:30) and the weekend has been busy. I guess it’s time to get back to work! Oh, and to RubySoccer too ;-)
I agree it makes sense. In South America we don’t have such a rule, so some managers may do as you said, lose some points on purpose to play more international matches by qualifying for Sudamericana instead of Libertadores. In RL this doesn’t happen because Libertadores gives teams more money and more exposure, but let’s not talk about economy yet ;-)
Yes, it has been suggested. I was reluctant at that time because I wanted to standardize all competitions to make it easier to design and eliminate the need to keep up with real life changes in the rules. Now I feel like discussing it :-)
What a shame! Trying to fool the system! I won’t tell you whether or not it works :-D
Anyway, I feel this is not completely balanced but it is good the hear Dhimitri had some success by paying outrageous wages to young talents (that’s one of our goals). Other factors are yet to be considered in the player’s decision, the first team opportunity was just the first one included.
I will go with Sly and don’t reveal things anymore…but you guys already got the general idea ;-)
Wow, 8 players from Tigre! No wonder why they win Libertadores every season. Ch Craggs was sold by me to R.S. de Gijon when I was managing Cerro Largo…he is a hell of an attacker!
This is something we need to enhance in the match engine, keepers are stronger than they should be because usually the number of shots is higher than it should be.
The improvement will stop when he reaches 31, no matter what.
New logic in place to prevent teams from the same country to face each other in the group stage of international competitions. When it is inevitable (for example when we have 5 teams from the same country to distribute in 4 groups) the new logic is not used at all. These inevitable situations will soon disappear when we introduce enough countries to have 8 groups.
Cheers!
You stand cpu teams to be even worse? :-)
Well, the rules are the same for managed and cpu teams, currently players don’t look at that when choosing where to go. One thing we can certainly review is the minor clubs decision, maybe 33% of the wage is too much.
@Dirk: maybe…I think the idea is that not playing should negatively influence everybody, not only older players
@Kuroyuki: yes, it is random, until 40 players lose an average of 10% of each skill…there’s been some discussion around whether or not all skills should decrease or just a few like speed for example…the thing is, the way the simulation works, reducing only speed may not reflect very well the impact of age whereas reducing all skills do the trick
Starting at 31, players have a chance to lose 1 point every 12 turns. The older the player, higher the chance:
10% at 31
20% at 32
…
100% at 40
Well, it’s just a way of saying “we can expect nothing with the current level of players we have compared to the other teams in the competition”. So in this situation you usually lose only 1 or 2 points on games lost, unless the score was really negative. Improving the squad would make the board expect something better next season :-)
This is how it works:
- each team has an average skill based on its main players (I can’t tell you exactly how many players are considered, but I can say it is greater than 11 and less than 30…lol)
- before a match, the teams’ average skill is compared, the home team advantage is considered and an expected result is defined…keep in mind that this is independent of the actual players used, given that the average skill already reflects the team’s ability to rotate players
- after a match the actual result is compared to the to expected result and bonus / penalties are given to the teams
It is as simple as that, so the board doesn’t care which players you’re actually using, but the ones the team has available. Also, it doesn’t matter who is your opponent, except for the fact you’ll be expected to win by a larger margin against weaker opponents.
The idea of using more than 11 players to determine the team potential is exactly to evaluate the ability to rotate players without suffering much, so when you play using second string players you should still be able to do ok if you are highly rated. If we always use the actual 11 players used in a match we will allow managers to always use their worst players without being penalized for that. Why should the board allow you to do that and say “oh, well, we lost 5×0 because we didn’t use the star players that we have” ;-)
The board evaluation is not based on the best eleven, they consider a few more players than that, the board knows you must rotate some players during the season :-)
Nice idea. This plus player morale (which would be related to playing official matches) would certainly make things more interesting.
If my calculations are correct you’ve lost around 4% for losing at home and around 34% for being knocked out of the national cup in the round of 16 by a second division team while you manage one of the strongest German teams :-)
But I understand your concerns, it’s just that we have to severely punish this early eliminations situations…and also reward them, if the other team had a manager.
That’s much better than the boring 0×0 matches in the World Cup! :-D
Are you guys sure about that? I think he will miss a match only if he plays less than the required 35 minutes or so. Has anyone seen a loaned player miss a match for not starting the match even if he entered later on in time to play at least 35 minutes?
Corners only consider the passing ability. Free kick (towards the goal) is 80% shooting and 20% control. Penalty kick is only shooting.