Recent Posts by Gabriel Cesario
4,200 posts(s) found
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.
When we contacted him on his previous team about this behavior he responded saying his team’s finace was good enough to support it. And he was right. I believe it is the same situation again.
I am not saying I’m happy with it and that I agree, we will change the way players pick the team they’re going to, probably adding some personality attributes.
The problem in Turkey is that we are usually able to find decent free young players instead of raising ours. When more countries are added this is likely to change since the competition for good free players will increase and our young ones will become more interesting and useful.
Good luck with your player, let me know if you ever build up a star whose career started at Sivasspor :)
@Admir M: I still read the forums and access the game even when I am not developing anything new ;)
Danilo said everything I would say about game development, so I have nothing to add. About the agent fee suggestion I feel we will probably have to add something like that. And also the player personalities, this one we already had in mind.
Great attacking midfielder available, check it out:
http://www.rubysoccer.com/game/player_info/68840
It is ok for the value to decrease sometimes, specially because the estimated value calculation formula is based on real transfers, so if the average transfer value is lower now than it was before players value tend to decrease, even youths.
Stadium capacity is also supposed to limit the amount you receive from sponsors. I will double check that to make sure it is working as intended.
Haven’t had time to look at it during the holiday, everything looks fine now though.
No news yet. I like you suggestion, Joseppi, it is a nice incentive :)
It works the same way as human managed teams, if the players is listed you can make an offer, otherwise you can’t. One significant difference is that bot teams do not negotiate the price.
Not with the current design, the only option is to adjust the coach level and it will affect all skills equally.
If you are worried about ticket income, don’t. On friendlies the income is equally split between the two teams ;)
Well, I just mentioned the scouting department cause it’s the cheapest of all (60k on lvl 10). And remember that in this scenario you could get the desired position by chance like it is today, the scouting level would just increase the chance of getting the desired position.
The system should definitely do something about this! We shouldn’t have let him not have a keeper in the first place. We already have a few mechanisms to prevent that, but we are aware of some gaps.
He was not fired yet cause nobody wanted to take the team and he is not inactive long enough (cause he is on vacation).
@Ulisses: also interesting, and easier to do.