Recent Posts
18,551 posts(s) found
I’d find it very handy if on the team_matches or match_report screens (or both if possible) I could see the name of whichever of my named formations I used in the match.
My “Reserves” and “Youths” squads often share a number of players, so it can be hard to tell, looking back at past matches, whether I put out the reserve team or the youth team.
I’m searching a goalkeeper with GK around 80. (Probably everybody is doing this) but if you have such a goalkeeper and you want to sell him send me a message.
I will give you a lot of money for him. :-)
Cheers
You’re right Tiago. We have a bug entered in our bug system to fix that. CPU teams will not use their first squad on friendlies. After we change that we’ll also make CPU teams invite other teams for friendlies in order to evolve their squads.
Cheers.
Hello,
I was p.ferreira manager in portugal medium ticker, and i had a lot of friendly matches scheduled in order to advance my youth a other squad players. I resigned p ferrerira in favour of spoting.
i noticed that, after my resignation, the computer started to sell many players, that is correct because i had 35 or so… but in all the friendly games the computer uses always the best team… so, i think this is one way of cheating, if a team is not being managed by a person, just invite them to play every single tick and if they accept, you will have a way of ruining their championship.
Take a look at p ferreira stamina.
regards
Friendlies wanted!
Portsmouth, FastTicker.
I can play every turn.
Fixed.
Ok. But he is already 30 years old. With a younger and better player I would do this. But he’s not worth it. He won’t be in my mean squad. Thanks anyway.
Yeah, the problem is that he won’t accept an abrupt wage reduction, so you’d have to accept the high wage if you wanted to buy him and then try to reduce it on contract renewal.
Cheers.
The player on which I did a bid was Andy Jones
My team was one of the 2 teams that want to buy him. But he asks a wage of 19500 for 1 year. It’s a bit high for me righ now. Surely for such a player. He is not one of the best in the game.
I will search an other one to buy :-)
Bug fixed, the balance on period start was inaccurate.
I’ve just adjusted the wages of 2 players on MediumTicker:
Andy Jones from Arsenal (444,444 to 35610)
Gary Wanless – Manchester United (222,222 to 30680)
The previous wages would be unacceptable with the new logic and nobody would be able to buy these players with such high wage, as they wouldn’t accept a fair wage during the negotiations. Arsenal got back half the money spent with the high wage to come back from bankruptcy. Manchester had the player only for a few turns so the economy is not ruined.
There were 2 offers for Andy Jones, both were deleted due to these changes.
Cheers.
Unfortunately I was forced to implement the code to ban users. We already banned one user that have created more logins after one of our warnings.
Edited by Gabriel: users in the same network as the banned user will also be punished as a collateral effect. Please, tell your friends not to cheat :-)
The Board now doesn’t allow unrealistically high wages to be offered. The limit depends on the player quality.
We have bugs entered for most points you raised Hugo, they’re good points. Specially the manager being sacked with expensive players being fired and the rule to avoid the situation where you buy more than one player at once, leading you to bankruptcy.
About high wages, at least now we have a limit to the wage a manager can offer, depending on the player quality. I’ll post that on the improvements topic by the way.
Cheers.
It’s easy to say a lot of things but implementing is another thing :)
To finish the first point, some situations shouldn’t happen, if you have 1.200.000$ and in a certain turn you try to buy 3 players of 1.000.000$, you might win them all in the end of the turn and finish with a -1.800.000$ result… Also, when negative, managers shouldn’t be able to buy players, even if they are free…
There is an alternative (as in reality) to the player 72 turns team fidelization, time windows to buy players, as there are in most leagues, a manager can sell the whole year but can only buy in certain time windows acording to each league…
Let’s try to animate the thing then (Player Market Regulation): half season (72 turns) before being able to sell a player you’ve just hired will not solve the problem if other rules don’t follow (in my opinion), and I guess the most important one is to sack a manager when his team is bankrupt!
I’d say a manager that enters in negative result should be sacked after 18 turns (6 league games) negative or if the result goes under -500.000$, this way there’s an opportunity to recover (sometimes the season calendar isn’t fair, that’s my reason to allow entering the negative result) and a STOP sign to crazy wages…
After a sacked manager, the most expensive (wages) players should be released free in the market, one by one, and some of the players (by value) should be for sale until the team gets positive again… A bit like reality lol A sacked manager should be relegated in favour to a none sacked when applying for a new team…
Formation “Save as” button implemented.
ps: the validations are not performed correctly (yet). so if you try something odd you will have a system error.
I have slightly changed the criteria used for CPU teams when looking for players. That shouldn’t solve this problem yet, as the main goal of my change is to prevent CPU teams from offering ridiculously high wages for players. Let’s what happens.
Cheers.
I have a personal record of 76 CPU teams after a lousy player from my sales… And a top 5 player sale to CPU team where all had more than 25 teams (CPU)… I think this happened because the player was at his price, and somehow, CPU teams understood that his value would be less than the player real value…
Anyway, the point is: If you remove player from sale, improve price, CPU teams will return…
Great!
Suggestion done.
That’s correct Ricardo.
Cheers.
So, stamina has changed?
If i followed it correctly, instead of 4(L)ost -3(G)ained we now have 3L-2G?
Souds better, to be honest 4L-3G made it a bit too easy. :)
At least he wouldn´t have the excuse to say that he didn’t know that he couldn´t manage more than one team…and it would be more dificult : he must log on diferent IP’s, has to get another e-mail account, and so on…
This point i believe it´s easy ans efficient!
Cheers
That sounds good. Then we know something but we still aren’t completely sure. The game stays interesting but my problem is solved.
I wait for the board :-)
Nice! :)
Thanks!
sure thing, Hugo.
cheers
BTW,
the market starts to regulate itself, but there are still some measures to improve the game…
I’d like to know if my opinion will have feed back or I can put some ideas in this topic, it is related after all…
Shortly… The one exposed by the developers (minimum contract time before resell), maximum number of players in a squad, negative budget manager sanctions and limited wage offers are some of the ideas I’d like to debate…
Thanks for the advice. I missed this one.
DrG