Subject: game is dead ? what would you change

if you gave up the game ... why are you still bothering? :)

Because I love the tactic aspect, because I like the 2D viewer, because I like this kind of game, because I still hope the Dev could wake up etc...

Decrease of managers, DEVs behaviour, Sokker is dying, etc etc etc .... all of this is also already in all the other topics that are made :/ So I really don't understand why this topic is different from all the other topics with the same subjects.

There is nothing to understand, so don't waste to much time to think about it.
(edited)

Goalunited has so many users cause of great advertising.If sokker would do that it would get at least few hundred thousand users.(if sokker would be advertised in the same way as goalunited)

it's not only about advertising...

there were times when sokker had 1k registrations/week...but 95% of users left in first week after registration...

(@everyone)

Has anybody thought about when they would train their young and bad players, if friendlies are removed from the game and ie replaced with an extra league game?

You would get the same problem as in the cup: how bad can my Team B be today?

Imo, friendlies are very important in the development of the club, because the result doesn't really matter, apart from ranking a.s.o.

What would I change? I would add the option to rewind in a game.

I think it would be nice if we would have 28 championship matches in the season instead of 14. And because of the reason, that we have to train our young players, too, we would have a big decision before every match: how should I play today? Which of my players should play?

That could make the championship more fun. OK, in this case, you would have to make standup etc. twice a week, but you can make your tactic weeks before the match. And with 2 championship matches, we could have a little bit faster development of our players.

Imo the friendlies would be an option, like now, the different would be that the friendly games would be played at wednesday. The teams who are participants in the Champions Cup, wouldn't have a chance to play friendlies till they are in the CC.

With 2 games/week there should be no friendlies and training should be separated from the games, as simple as that.

Any other option would be just stupid...6 games/week? 2 trainings/week? Get a life...

The training works perfect as it is, the only aspect i would like to change is for it to be less restrictive, maybe there should be primary training (say Striker for ATT, then a secondary training which would apply to all players but not be as thorough.

Its already there if i understand you correct....

I think it would be nice if we would have 28 championship matches in the season instead of 14. And because of the reason, that we have to train our young players, too, we would have a big decision before every match: how should I play today? Which of my players should play?

Technically, that would be the same as just chosing not to play friendlies. I mean, if the problem here (as stated by the original poster) is that he cannot be bothered to arrange a friendly, then he is free to just play the league and cup games, and just not play friendlies. This will give him a good first team and no B-team. The first team would get training and he does not have to arrange friendlies.

If there were no friendlies and only league and cup games, I would have a good first team and no B-team. My first team would get training and I wouldn't have to arrange friendlies.

Problem: slower development of young players, higher prices. 10 seasons of building up and training, then 10 seasons of being a good team and not training.

Bottomline: if it ain't broke - don't fix it :)

It was just an idea. I can't understand that from which money will you pay the high costs of helding such a good A-team? You won't have so many income from stadium and sponzor, or will you?

No, exactly. So you would either be a team training for profits or a team trying to get results. Not both, as it is now, with friendlies. To answer your question: The money would come from several earlier seasons of being beaten while training for profits and saving it.

Of course, you could also play with the good team every second time, which - imho - would just cause crazy (even unfair) results in the league. Imagine everybody putting their bad team against the favorite, because they'll most likely lose anyway. He'll end up winning the league with a score of 200-0 and max.points. And then he'd most likely leave the game because it is boring.

I don't know :) - I just think it works like it is, with the training time, the league system, the friendlies - especially with the friendly leagues, so you don't have to arrange the games every week. I do think some things could improve. I'd for instance love to see XP have more impact, possibly making older players more valuable (Edit: and providing a reason to put young players on the first team, as well as a bonus for creating a NT-player /edit). It's like they are old when they are 26 now. And the rewind-button - the rewind-button! "Let me slow down and see that goal again!"
(edited)

And in what way would that be realistic?

The rewind?

I just mean when you watch the game. You can fast forward and pause. I'd like to be able to rewind. That's not unrealistic. My cassette player from 1985 can do that.

We don't know how much weights XP now, if my infos are good.

Bonus for creating NT-player - the players from small countries will have a much bigger price than now, because obviously it's easier to create an NT-player for a small (in sokker world of course) country than for Poland for example. And who will have so much money that he can afford this: big clubs. So there will be another advantage for them. Ok, this bonus will be very good for the NT of small countries, too. :D But the fact is true that 27+ players are a little bit old for training.

Rewind button is a great idea.

Rewind is fine, I'm talking about the rest ;)

Many players, and sure news players think that the game evolution is a bit slowly.
A solution (as Etienne told) were to grow the number of matches par week but many coachs don't agree, with solids reasons.

There is another solution to accelerate teams' accession in a upper division and to avoid the boredom because stagnation in the same group with the same teams ...

Actually:
first div. is one group of 8 teams
2nd div. is formed by 4 groups of 8 teams = 32 teams
3th div. is formed by 4 X 32 teams
4th div is 4 X the number of 3th team etc ...

If dev replace those "x4" by a "x2" ...
it will accelerate the evolution of ours teams and make the game more interesting with less stagnation and players leaving the game too soon.

For example in the new 2d div. (call it first League-B):
there were 2 groups with 8 teams. The system matches for a week will stay the same.
The two first teams of each group will up in first League-A (replacing 7th and 8th)
The two seconds team's will play barrages against 5th an 6th of L1-A.
And it's ok too for div. under.
And if you are the champion, you are sure to up! No stagnation more!

In the same time the downest div. (and only those one) could goes as a junior div.
I mean, only one group with all human's teams.
Of course dev. have to fix problems of this system, but it will outing a lot of bots teams and made the game for a new player more interesting.
(edited)