Recent Posts
18,562 posts(s) found
Still hoping we get some stats / awards to make it more fun :-)
I’m not sure what the priority is (or should be) of the AI, the management of computer teams. But I think there is a relatively simple way to improve it: let them not ignore stamina and rotate players more. So to add a rule that a computer team won’t play with players under stamina x if there is a decent replacement.
I currently ignore morale for 17/18/19 year olds, 20 year olds I try to give games or loan out. But I also think it is (too) hard to avoid critical morale for young players.
I also agree that in this case it’s logical to mimic real life. Every tiebreak rule is debatable, might as well follow real life.
I do think it is hard to keep young players happy when playing in tough leagues.
My teams are in South America which has relatively easy continental cups (at least during the group phase), so I have been managing to give my youngsters some field time. I realize this is much harder in Europe, especially if you are playing in the most competitive leagues (Spain, England, Portugal…)
My suggestion is make rules for them to play after the 55th min if you are winning by 2-3 goals…and yes, there is some risk involved there
What I do think would be quite helpful is to have a more active loan market – that would probably strengthen computer teams and give our youngsters a higher morale. Especially on Fast Tick there are 90+ players listed on loan that are simply unwanted!
Why are we limited to a pre-selected list? Would it be possible to choose whatever player we want from that country?
In larger countries (Brazil, England, Spain…) there are plenty of options and it would be great to have more choices that sometimes are more suitable to a particular tactic than the ones offered by the list
Agree to Joseppi – we should mimic real life here
I admit I’m biased though – already won a league in Brazil due to the ridiculous rule that # of victories is more relevant than goals difference… :-)
I don’t want to be the person that is always complaining, but I’m still not convinced about the implementation of morale at present.
I am currently having to sell 3 of my 20 year old players, who according to my scouts will be brilliant players. I have to sell them though as they are currently not good enough to play and so have developed critical morale. So therefore they won’t re-sign a contract. This is not a bug, this is how morale has been implemented, they don’t get game time, so they’re not happy, fair enough.
My question is, how can a manager keep a player like this? Essentially I am hurting my team’s prospect in the long run, to maintain the relative success that the club is currently achieving. I’m not asking for a morale reset or anything like that, but I am wondering if morale can be implemented in a slightly different way. For example morale levels dependent on player age. So young players are affected a lot less by not playing, whereas older players would be affected more, due to their careers coming to an end and so wanting to make the most of the playing time they have left. Then maybe a morale level for 25-30 year olds or similar. I think what I’m asking for is tiered morale levels dependent on player age.
At present it seems to me to be virtually impossible to keep all players happy and win games and be successful. I could be wrong, I have been before and will be again, but feel I should air my views. I would also be interested to see what others think, both managers and developers.
I disagree, it should stay as it is in real life, you win the league (in most country’s) by being the best over the whole season. Two games against second place shouldn’t matter.
Managers will now receive messages when a player is injured during a match.
Thanks for the suggestion, Roberto! We have the ability to have different tie break rules for each country so we could mimic real life rules. At the moment all countries (except Brazil) follow this rule: goals difference, goals for, number of wins. Brazil has number of wins as first criterion, as in real life.
We are still uncertain on how much we should follow real life rules and try to keep up with them and how much we should have our own global rules to make all countries balanced. Currently I’m leaning towards having our own global rules. I know some leagues in real life have direct matches as their first criterion to break ties, and it definitely sounds more exciting.
Let’s see if anyone else would like to voice their opinions about this topic.
I think that goal average must be considered in direct matches instead of global goal difference in national leagues. It has no sense that you could won both matches to a team, and then this team wins the National League with same points than yours because of better global goal difference. For example, Spanish League this season (62): Real Madrid won both matches against Sevilla, but lost the competition because of worst goal difference. It could be a future improvement…
Kind regards.
Roberto.
The board expectations logic has been fixed so that the calculated number your team is measured against aligns with the expectation the board tells you. During the last season tick I had to re-generate expectations to manually fix it, next season tick will have it calculated correctly without need for manual intervention.
When you successfully get players out of Critical we basically “reset” their morale, meaning they will start the match count again as if they have just joined your team.
Makes sense, added to the list.
Thanks!
To be exact: Not Neymar was at 17% after five games, still critical. Then he went to neutral, but 0%? A few ticks later he’s suddenly at 48%. Is it bugged?
broken is broken
I agree that young players should be happy with playing just a few matches. I have one who has played 5 matches so far, but he is stil critical. It’s not Neymar.
Perhaps send a message when a player gets injured during a match?
Not at present, everything seems to be running ok, thanks.
I probably did for that one, any other players to watch?
It’s running again!
Cheers
Fast ticker stuck at 9%
It was Steven Cass (fast ticker) but now his morale has shot up and he will renew. Not sure if you did something to fix this or not?
I see, so Neymar should be ok with not playing until he is 25…? Just checking.
an 18 year old should not have a critical moral how the fuck does he expect to get 1st team play critical should only effect 25 year olds and higher
Wait, I couldn’t see it happening on the test I just did. Can you please let me know here or via in-game message which player are you concerned about so I can keep an eye on him?
Critical and bad morale players have the same small penalty on their own performance. They don’t affect the performance of their teammates.
That is definitely a bug! Anyone else on the same situation? I can fix it manually for you whilst the bug is not fixed.
Thanks for reporting, Sniff!
So I loaned a young player out and his morale doesn’t improve when he plays games at the CPU team and now his contract is running down he doesn’t want to renew. This seems to be a problem, if players morale doesn’t improve whilst playing for CPU teams.
I can’t play all my squad players so my thought was to loan them out to improve morale, but it would appear that for loans to work you have to loan out players with good morale, which sort of defeats the purpose of either the loan or the morale, does it not?