Recent Posts
18,535 posts(s) found
This was a kind of anti-cheat measure, to prevent managers from letting good players go on purpose. The issue that needs to be fixed here is the calculation that makes this player be considered good for your team when you don’t consider him to be. Another issue is to have proper anti-cheat tools to investigate each scenario rather than block manager actions such as yours that are not cheating related. For the moment I’ll get rid of that player for you, alright?
Hi guys, like the old days, a post to anounce my resignation from managing Reading.
As the game is changing so much lately I feel its a good oportunity for a new start over and see how this this new feauters work in a growing team…
About the time in Reading, I leave with the feeling I did a good job, but for the first time since I play RS, is not a wining sensation. Mostly because of the great competition, I would say the best RS has seen, its nice not to be the “special one” lol
For the future, probably return home now… Since Benfica is taken, I’ll see what other portuguese team I choose… Take a chance and come join me in the fight…
“Juan Demichelis’s contract has been renewed. We couldn’t let him leave the club.”
But I didn’t want to keep him, hence the reason for letting his contract run down. I don’t really feel as if I am managing the club(s) in this game any more. If a player gets annoyed, he is automatically transfer listed, the board decide to keep players I want to get rid of. I don’t understand what aspect of management I am partaking in here. Can these issues be fixed? Otherwise I don’t see how people are going to become attached to clubs in the game, unless they are a dedicated Sunderland fan!
Morale has been reset and the third and (hopefully) final phase of the morale trial has begun! Stamina and relative player skill will be taken into consideration when players don’t play a match and give a small increase to the rating instead of zero contribution. This shouldn’t make much difference for older players but will definitely help managing younger players morale, even though they will still have to play every now and then.
If this proves to be the last trial what I’ll do once it is over is reset the morale once again, reduce the transfer multiplier for critical morale players to what we originally intended (the price you see now divided by 10), change the contract renewal process so critical morale players will not accept renewal offers and finally increase the maximum numbers of players in a team to 40. This last one has been requested for a while, not so sure managers will be so eager to have that many players now that morale is in place ;-)
Cheers
We did not give this options because the scout reports belong to the team, not to the manager.
Is it possible to get an option to remove old scouting reports from http://rubysoccer.com/game/scout_reports ?
Small improvements to the players morale screen:
-fixed sorting
-included morale rating column
I would only add 1 morale status like excellent. This way ‘neutral’ is really in the middle and is in fact neutral. E.g. excellent – good – neutral – bad – critical.
This 2nd trial phase looks fine to me. I just need to figure out how to manage my youths.
I think I’ll add a morale rating column with a % to give more detailed information to managers on morale, along with some other changes for the last trial phase. That will be quicker than catering for additional statuses as you suggested, Joseppi. Not saying we’re not going to do it in the future, I just want to simplify the initial design so we can deliver it quickly.
That’s because it’s in TRIAL MODE Davison. Things will change once the balance is correct.
On the whole player morale part, as I suggested in another post, I would like to have more morale settings. Eg very happy, happy, content, poor, bad, very unhappy.
It means it won’t jump from bad to critical really fast, which seems to be happening, look how full the transfer list is! Some of my top players are critical even though they have played 20+ games lol, I just think adding in the extra morale levels will give better control to the managers.
this moral thing is being retarded…. look at all the transfer listed players now 2432432423432423 price
@Sniff: we’ll introduce the squad status thing in a later stage, but it’s definitely a great idea. Morale is not really linear, we have three different stages based on player age, within those stages it is somewhat linear, but the percentage of matches played demanded is very different between different stages.
@Dr. Gullit: agreed, I’ll wait a few more days and inroduce additional changes for a 3rd and final trial
Comparing with the 1st trial phase, the 2nd trial is much better … However, I am very happy with the morale situation for the younger players which are lowering morale still too fast.
Participating in 20 % of official match should not bring down the morale of young players. As I remember, they are being punished in on the road matches because they are young …
How about the idea (slightly borrowed from FM) that when you sign a player you can offer them a certain squad status. The squad status would then relate to their morale level. So if you sign a player and say they will be a first team player then never play them their morale will go bad very quickly, but if you signed a youth and said they’d be a squad player or a potential future player their morale would go down at a much slower rate from not playing.
At present it appears that morale is implemented on a linear scale, having different squad status’ would possibly make this more manageable for managers.
That’s because they evaluate the last x matches, starting from when I last reset morale (or from when you or they joined your team, whatever is later) and up to a pre-determined number of matches, but they only change morale for the first time after 3-5 matches, so even if you played them in the last match it could mean they played 1 out of 5 which would give them a 20% match participation ration that could take their morale to bad level depending on their profiles.
I’ve players that have played last game, and morale has gone bad. why?
Glad to see this back to life after trial phase 2 started. First of all let me reinforce that nobody is at risk of losing their players during the trial, they will still renew their contracts even if they are at Critical morale level and I doubt anyone will pay the transfer price currently being set. That said I’ll give my directed responses as usual:
@midcheshire: don’t worry about losing players just yet, we will announce when morale is there for real and reset the values once again. Regarding friendlies…no, they don’t count for morale.
@Joseppi: from a starting point (when morale is reset or a player joins a new team for example) it takes between 3 and 5 matches for the player to first evaluate his match participation and his morale to move accordingly to Good or Bad and it takes between 7 to 12 matches for the player morale to go to Critical if he has not played enough in that period. From that point onwards each match will be included in the calculations and the morale may change after every match. Remember this is done as “percentage of last x matches that I’ve played”.
@Filipe: took the words from my mouth…or from my fingers in this case
@Northstar: as I’ve pointed out in a different topic and poll, there are too many good players so I think most teams end up hiring instead of loaning. I’ve changed the player generation process to rectify this, but it will take some time to see the results as existing players start to age. CPU teams may loan some good players but then we may have another issue related to how they evaluate if a player is good for their squads…this is going to improved soon.
Is this second phase of the trial any better? I feel I’m able to control morale a bit better…I still have 2 critical players that I wish were not critical but that’s because I didn’t setup my team properly over the weekend and used my default formation in most matches. I still have to field some really unskilled players from time to time so that they won’t go to critical, but that should be ok.
I have some additional ideas to put in place (apart from what has been suggested already) but I want to have further feedback before either starting the morale for real or starting a trial phase 3.
Morale is still under trial, that’s the only reason why the players accept renewals and the transfer prices are silly. Once we are happy with the parameters and the trial is over the transfer prices will be what you see now divided by 10 and the players will NOT renew contract. You’re right, that’s the whole purpose of the thing :-)
Not sure if this is a bug or just how morale is implemented, but I believe that something is wrong/incorrect.
A player with critical morale automatically gets listed for a silly price (which is something I dislike, but that’s another story). However, if a player has critical morale and is listed, but their contract is running out, you can still get them to re-sign for you. Surely this defeats the whole purpose of critical morale levels? If I’d not played any games and my morale was at a critically low level, why would I sign a new contract?
If this were to be implemented in a slightly better way, managers would actually have to manage their squads and if they failed to do so, players would leave or want to leave and this might finally spark the transfer market into life as managers would be forced to sell players that they probably wanted to keep as squad players. Therefore the more active managers would be able to make offers for players that would otherwise be unavailable and possibly we would have an active transfer market.
Id happily loan players out however no club ever wants to loan my players even when they have good stats!
I really liked both player morale and contract renewal changes. It makes player relation to the team more challenging, before this we could say players were like robots, used them as we wished and they would always behave the same…
In real life, if you dont plan to use a player, you either loan or sell him, in RS we can do this any time in the season…
Yeah there’s def still improvements to be made, morale changes far too quick most of the time.
This morale rule is horrendous, I am going to be left with no decent squad players, two more want to leave, I had to loan out some of my squad. How are you supposed to keep up and coming players and field your best team also? Not for me I’m afraid. I can understand if these are playing no games at all, surely the friendlies must count for something? I will have to use youth players for injuries and red cards :(
@Davison: the last couple years don’t count, we did virtually nothing on them
@Sniff: this is a result of the poor way in which the board evaluates your squad in comparison to the others. In your case your team seems to be highly rated by the board, as a result every victory gives you a little bit and every draw/loss takes a lot, making it too hard to recover from a bad board rating. What I’ll do is I’ll bring forward the task to review the way squad quality is calculated and see if that improves the expectation and performance calculations. If it does not or is not enough I’ll bring forward the task to revisit the way the board evaluates the performance until we get it right.
Thanks for the feedback guys.
dont hold your breath ive been bringing this very topic up for years
6th in PL, top of Europa Cup group and still the board hate me. (Fast ticker – Blackburn)
Your Performance: 3%
This is ludicrous, please can we look into improving how the board view the manager? I mean if I was bottom of the league and out of Europe it would be fair to be at 3% or below, but once you get to a low % of approval with the board it appears to be virtually impossible to please them.
As I usually say, the rules are the same for all so you’re not the only one losing players. That’s not to say the rules are good as they are, it’s just to reiterate that nobody is being treated unfairly. The reason to introduce such change was to make contract negotiations something to give some thought about instead of simply offering any wage to start with and wait for the player to reply. There is no fun in that at all and it is also unrealistic as the players had very little say in the process. Now if you give him something that he consider far from his expectations he will have a say.
Morale was introduced as a trial exactly for this reason, so it doesn’t negatively impact anyone while it’s being tested. Unfortunately RubySoccer is not our real work at the moment so we cannot invest as much time as we’d like to thoroughly test all new features. We rely on live tests more often than not.
A new investment area has been added: Negotiations. This area of the club will provide you advice on how much to offer a player you are negotiating with. The highest the level more accurate the suggestion. All clubs have the maximum level on this area to start with so they can experience the full benefits of it. Next season you will be able to decide how much to invest in this area as you do for all others. Hopefully this will mitigate some of the negative impacts of the enhance player negotiations.
You will see the suggested wage when offering a contract to a player and the wage field will come pre-populated with the suggestion (except when you are looking at an existing negotiation, in which case it will come populated either with your own offer or with the player’s counter offer as usual). I am yet to add the suggested wage to the mobile version of the contract offer screen.
I dont even know why uve changed the way contracts are renewed becos there was nothing wrong with the way it was. You started negotiations with an opening offer, they came back to you with what they wanted and u then had a choice of either continuing to negotiate or offer them what they wanted which was then accepted. Now u dont know what they want and if u dont hit on the right number they cancel negotiations and u have no option to try again. That is plain stupid and unrealistic. Yes the new investement area will perhaps help but shud of been implemented with the contract changes so that managers arent loosing players right left and center.
Both the contracts and moral changes should of been tested first to make sure they work properly and fairly rather than just thrown into a live game were they are now messing up peoples teams.