Recent Posts by Gabriel Cesario
4,184 posts(s) found
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
C’mon Ulisses, you won this one…just kidding :D
Cough, cough…there is a lot of dust around here! RubySoccer ain’t dead mates, it has finally been updated. Hopefully following news won’t take so long.
Managers now can’t fire or let their best players go, their board won’t allow it. Of course there will be lots of discussions around how the board evaluates the best players, but at least it is a start. One of our goals with it is to prevent users from losing good players for lack of attention or doing it on purpose.
Cheers!
We already invested some time in the game after moving to Australia guys, but clearly not enough. Danilo is working in modifications that will allow us to better test and change match engine parameters. While he does that I may work on the matter discussed here.
I’m not going to say my opinion about what this or that manager is doing, I’m just going to tell you what are my plans and how they could change this scenario. They are in the order we are likely to implement them:
1) Automatic renewal of best players: the board will be more strict and renew best players contracts automatically and will not allow the manager to fire them as well.
2) Player personality: each player will have its own personalitiy, some may prefer high wages, some long-term contracts while some may prefer playing in its own country or being in a team where he has more first team opportunities. This will make free transfers (and regular transfers) a little bit more complex than a wage war.
3) Player satisfaction: players that are never used in official matches or that have much lower wages than similarly skilled teammates may become unsatisfied and refuse to renew their contract. This may negatively affect other players in the squad. This will make it harder for managers to hire lots of players just to make profit or to experiment.
These are the main ideas, some of them are not straightforward as they seem but I believe they will bring more fun and strategy to the game.
Cheers!
Very suspicious indeed. Contacted one of the managers to investigate. Thanks Cleithon.
There are no prizes or awards yet, we need to better balance the game economy before doing that :)
It’s not about it being acceptable or not, but working the system as you said. We are aware this is bad for game economy and balance between big and small clubs so we will review that. :)
Just double checked the formula, it uses a base value and a random factor. This base value is based on your team performance, in other words, the team score in the teams ranking. If your team base value is greater than your stadium capacity times 10, then your stadium capacity times 10 is used as your base value. So I was almost right :)
I haven’t confirmed if the formula is exactly that, so don’t consider the values above as the truth. But answering your question, the maximum can be obtained by having good performance. More specifically, sponsorship value is directly related to you team’s score in the teams ranking.
The stadium capacity was supposed to limit the sponsorship value somehow. Not sure what the exact formula is, but it would be something like:
10,000 seats → 100,000 sponsorship maximum
15,500 seats → 155,000 sponsorship maximum
…
and so on.
We do understand, Jakob. According to our plans you wouldn’t lose your best defender anyway, cause our intention is to make the board automatically renew the best players contracts to make it harder for cheaters.