Recent Posts
18,535 posts(s) found
Team quality calculation will change next season. In the current system the team quality is solely based on the quality of the players in the team and that is then used to determine board expectations, manager performance increase/decrease and a few other things. If we look at the results versus expectations it is clear the existing method is not good enough in a lot of cases. That’s why starting next season the team quality will be competition based and include the previous season’s performance in each competition in addition to the quality of players. This should provide more realistic expectations and manager performance ratings.
@Charles: no, it doesn’t
Lee Coleman won’t renew contract, offers please
Fixed! Morale related screw up on my part, still needs permanent fixing, let’s hope it doesn’t happen again before I have time to investigate and fix it properly :-(
Fast ticker stuck at 90%
fast ticker is freezed!
does playing friendlies increase a players morale?
Or ignore it. Just make sure that they are not critical anymore when you have to renew the contract.
I’ve found that with my youngest non-youth players all they needed so far is to play 2-3 matches (out of 20+) so far to stay in Neutral. Of course that number can be different for each team and it should be easier to manage morale of players who have lower skills when compared to the calculated main squad skill.
this morale feature has some problems. I’ve under 20 players promoted from youth team with critical morale because they don’t play, or players with critical because they have too few matches (but with an avg rating of 4.7). bha…
We have a big change coming, but that will take a little longer to be ready. In the meantime we are improving the way the team quality is perceived to be competition specific. This will affect the board expectations, manager performance rating changes and team/manager ranking points. The goal is to have more realistic goals and match results effects. The new system will try to learn from the team’s previous participations in each competition and balance that with the current squad quality to provide a better result.
There was a postal soccer game – yes I am showing my age here – that for the life of me I can’t remember what it was called, but they used to allow amazing stadium upgrades. You could build executive boxes, seating or standing areas and then allocate which set of fans were in each section, you could also price each section differently. I always thought it added a nice element to the game. Executive boxes brought in silly money but were ridiculous in cost to build, maybe something along those lines. Just a thought though.
We are partially ready for allowing the ticket price change, the field exists in the database for all teams but it is currently set as 10 for everyone. What we need to do to enable this is implement some logic to reduce the attendance for higher ticket prices and vice-versa. The attendance then needs to have an effect on the team peformance to balance things out I believe.
I like your suggestion of allowing the manager to decide how many tickets should be available for the visitor team fans, but increasing the number of tickets available for visitores must also decrease the performance penalty received by the visitor team during the match.
I’ll add both these things to our task list.
thanks for the shout out and btw i agree with you sniff
Sunderland for Life me
Any thougths on allowing us to manage the ticket prices? Or even the idea of allowing us to allocate how many away fan tickets are allocated. So for example if you have the league leaders coming to visit and you usually get a 50,000 attendance, allowing the away team say up to 25,000 away fans? (Assuming all stadiums are 100k in size).
The main driver for attendance in the league is your current position, for the other competitions attendance gets higher the further you get. We can definitely improve (and we will) on attendance calculation and ticket pricing by introducing more variables such as club fan base, derby matches, etc. At the moment the variables are match importance (mainly), team quality, opponent quality.
I get 26k attendance against human manager, while I see CPU gets 70k attendance. ..
The income is low because there are no supporters in my stadium.
I don’t make money in medium ticker maybe we 20k a week.
2) That’s unfortunate, but fair. I guess I’ll change my requirements…
Agree. Just play it safe, check if you have any major contract renewals the following season, plan accordingly (i.e. set your Negotiations to 10) and offer 10-20% more than recommended to every player you really want. Every 10k in salary means ~500k per season – it should not make real difference in the budget and it is definitely not worth it to lose a player for such low amounts
The ticket price has not changed since the beginning of time, it has always been 10 per seat except on cup finals when it can go as high as 40 per seat in the Club World Cup.
Well Gabriel, here is my opinion.
I agree with Joseppi. I lost 1 player but that was my own fault and it wasn’t with the opening negotationbid. I took a risk to offer a lower bid in the second negotiation round and he refused and stopped negotiations. For a key players I won’t take the risk. Allthough I don’t directly give what my player asks for but I stay in what should be a safe margin to me.
The contract negotiations are fine the way the are now. Only extra contractclauses would be nice in the future.
Ok, my mistake. Seems logical to me.
What happend to the attendance and ticket prices?
I get very low attendance.
My money in bank didn`t increase for 3 seasons I think…
Tickets income both for League and Cup are the same?
Competition: Premiership
Attendance: 26401
Tickets: $264,010
10k per seat
Competition: FA Cup
Attendance: 16712
Tickets: 167,120
10k per seat
1) I was thinking about that when trying to manage my players’ morale as well :-D
2) CPU teams had been artificially assigned coaching level 10 for a long time but that’s been changed. The new minimum level for them is 5 but of course they can go beyond that by spending their own investment points. That said, I don’t think many of them have coaching level 10 anymore so I suggest you try reducing your coaching requirements.
Retiring players are not affected by morale. The idea is that they are not looking to change clubs in their last year as a football player so their rating will remain as 0% and they will never go out of Neutral.
2 quick suggestions on this topic, Gabriel:
1) Can you change the Morale panel so that we can sort by morale status and rank by the morale %? It will make it easier for visualizing and thus managing morale
2) Loan market seems dead in the Fast Ticker. I have from Tac 94 to Sho 96 that I have been trying to loan for over 1 season. I find it hard to believe that no CPU teams can benefit from having those players (I do demand coaching 10, but I imagine there are plenty of teams with that feature). Having loaned players will help control morale levels for upcoming youths. Moreover, it can make the game more competitive as CPU teams will have better squads
I’m not doing it as my next task, I’ll keep an eye on this topic and hopefully the discussion will have progressed further when it’s time for us to decide what to do, if anything. I tend to agree with your view Joseppi, I think the way things are it’s an additional challenge and actually adds something that could go wrong during contract negotiations where in the past it was a straightforward process. The Negotiations department is there for those who few it’s too hard to estimate a safe wage, as long as you have a high enough level you will be on the safe side most of the time just by following the suggested wage, if you have a low level the suggested wage will be occasionally too high or too low.
Gabriel, can you take a look at player morale of retiring players. Seems player morale of these players doesn’t change. Craig Mountford and Laurencio Silva who are retiring after this season stay at neutral 0%. They both played 3 of 6 matches but I haven’t seen changes in their morale since the reset.
Btw Same with Maron in mediumticker and he played all matches.
Don’t change it, you can’t keep making the game easier for players, the point of all this is you do lose good players!
So far since the changes I have lost ZERO players to contract negotiations, I look at the player, see how far they have progressed and then offer a suitable wage, if I really want the player to stay I add on 3-4K to what I believe he will accept.
It’s actually really simple
Yeah thats alot fairer and least gives managers a chance to give the player the wage he wants. That or the negotiation department cud give u a range, for example the player wud like a wage between 15-25k. That way u cud offer say 20k as ur opening offer, the player mite accept it but if not then have a chance to make an improved offer which cud be a little bit more or u cud just offer the top figure of 25k.