Recent Posts by Gabriel Cesario
4,164 posts(s) found
Title pages now contain runner-ups information.
Cheers!
Results like Spain 0 × 1 Switzerland makes me smile. You guys always want the best team to win… :-D
This kind of flexibility is also interesting. We’ve had similar suggestions in the past and I belive we could also do that at some level. Scouts could influence the amount of choices (positions to choose from, number of skill points you could change in the skill spread, etc). Nice!
I think we are getting somewhere! Before my previous post I thought about it but considered it a little bit too far off. Now that you mentioned I see we might have something interesting in our hands.
I understand your point and it does make sense. But also in real world there are some countries that have no tradition in football, so they don’t “generate” star players often and that’s what the ranking tries to reflect. Using your suggestion teams all over the world with equal scouting level would have equal chance of getting a star players in their youth academy. I think we could go for an intermediate solution, keeping the ranking as the main factor for youth quality but also using scout level to somehow raise the chance of getting a better youth more frequently. If we do that we’ll have to increase the maintenance value for the scouting department :)
Let’s see if this topic can lead us to an interesting discussion. Anyone else?
Everybody would have level 10 scouts, if that was the case, cause scouting department is cheap. And if we raised its price the rich teams would have a huge advantage all over the world, being able to raise and buy the best players at the same time.
This is still possible, but I may work on that soon :-)
After running hundreds of match simulations we’ve come up with a possible solution for the high number of “unjust” matches. These are the matches where a team clearly dominates the game but can’t win. Before the latest changes we had about 20%-25% of unjust results, now this number should be around 10%-15%. The small clubs must stand a chance, afterall :-)
Cheers!
Unfortunately, it is luck in this case.
So the young Robbie Williams used to be a football player? I didn’t know that :D
Aqui vão os meus comentários:
1) Obrigado pelo elogio, é sempre bom ler coisas positivas :)
2) Não há nenhum tipo de favorecimento a equipes do computador na simulação das partidas, posso garantir.
3) É provável que mudemos a maneira como o computador monta suas táticas pra que passe a usar táticas mais realistas, mas isso ainda não está definido.
4) Se algumas das partidas perdidas pro computador pareceram “injustas” como costumam chamar por aqui, ou seja, seu time dominou claramente a partida mas não venceu, saiba que estamos trabalhando nisso.
Enfim, de modo geral o que tenho a dizer é que as equipes do computador me surpreendem as vezes sim, mas enquanto joguei na Turquia e agora no Uruguai não vejo elas tendo destaque como acontece na França pelo que vc falou. A meu ver o computador é sim prejudica, e não beneficiado, pois não é inteligente em negociações e não faz uso de empréstimos. Nossa prioridade sempre é melhorar as funcionalidades pra atrair mais usuários e assim reduzir o número de equipes controladas pelo computador, por isso tornar as equipes sem técnico mais inteligentes acaba ficando pra segundo plano.
Abraço.
When being disputed by more than one club the players used to decide where to go based only in the highest wage, but not anymore. The player decision has been enhanced to also consider first team opportunity, in other words, how good he is compared to his future teammates in the same position.
Example: team A and team B are making offers to an attacker. In team A he would become the 2nd best attacker, in team B he would become the 4th best attacker. If team A and team B offer the same wage, or even if team B’s offer is slightly better, he will go to team A. In order to hire the player team B must make a much better offer.
There is no easy way to tell how much more team B needs to offer in a situation like the one above, only practical situations will tell you that. It really depends on player quality (the higher the quality, higher the wage difference needed) and relative position difference (2nd best vs. 3rd best, 1st best vs. 5th best…the higher this position difference, higher the wage difference needed).
Cheers!
Nope, the value is a little bit higher than usual but is not a bug. He is a pretty good player, would be a star in Turkey :D
Small adjustment to match parameters in a tentative to reduce the number of “unfair” results. Let’s keep an eye on the results. I’m sure you guys will keep informing us when any of these happens. Keep in mind that they should still happen, but less frequently.
@EverettB the tiebreaker is most goals scored as visitor. The penalty shootout happens only if the 2 scores are exactly the same.
Yep, it makes sense and shouldn’t be hard to do :)
The national cup draw is based on team quality, if these teams are constantly facing each other in the cup it means they’re keeping their relative quality among other Portuguese teams :)
The board considered him slightly worse than his current best, that’s why he was able to fire the veteran. And if you look at the stats individually the best he has know has 2 less points in speed but is better in everything else, except for keeping, of course…
We are willing to do changes like the one amacb suggested, which makes the life of cheaters harder.
Probably…having users navigating both dimensions while one of them is being updated certainly slows things down.
The manager has not logged in since I sent him a message, if he abandons the game I will consider him a cheater and ban him.
We’re glad you liked it, this is something we should have worked on a while back instead of worrying about increasing tick times ;)
It is strange…I’ll contact the manager.
Thanks.
Dimensions don’t get locked during the whole tick anymore, only during critical updates like contract negotiatons and job applications processing. It means you can still navigate in a dimension while most updates are being done. You should be aware that some changes might not be applied until the next update. For example, if you changed your formation during the update and your match that turn had already been processed your formation changes won’t be used until your next match.
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.
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 :)
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.
@Dhimitri: making the reward proportional to the player improvement changes things, now we can start considering this idea :D