Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [DEV] International Cup
"I'm playing at low level"
You are not the low level I'm talking about. You aren't earning only 50 000 $ a week through sponsors and ticket money.
You are not the low level I'm talking about. You aren't earning only 50 000 $ a week through sponsors and ticket money.
You're not talking about low level then, you are talking about new teams and even they make more. This is a different topic, new teams should be completely reworked.
It's not a different topic when those clubs are getting hit for 20%
And yes they very much are only getting that much. When I came back to this game I was getting 38 334 $ from the sponsors.
And yes they very much are only getting that much. When I came back to this game I was getting 38 334 $ from the sponsors.
After you, my friend! ;) I'm playing 2nd and you 5th rang. It is big difference, if you ask me!
(edited)
(edited)
IMO if it is needed to make changes to prioritize goals over just training in low League levels, then a Tax adjustment on Age must be added.
F.E.:
Keep 70% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 16 to 18
Keep 80% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 19 to 21
Keep 90% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 22 to 24
Keep 100% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players 25+
(edited)
F.E.:
Keep 70% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 16 to 18
Keep 80% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 19 to 21
Keep 90% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players From 22 to 24
Keep 100% of the Amount recieved (after Transfer Taxes) for Players 25+
(edited)
+ 1 thanks Geston for all your efforts keep trying to convince them pls
"It's not a different topic when those clubs are getting hit for 20%"
again, nobody is hit for -20%. there is an extra +0.5 home official game a week and -20% overall. which evens out, teams will get roughly the same as before. some a bit less, some a bit more.
again, nobody is hit for -20%. there is an extra +0.5 home official game a week and -20% overall. which evens out, teams will get roughly the same as before. some a bit less, some a bit more.
After you, my friend! ;) I'm playing 2nd and you 5th rang. It is big difference, if you ask me!
I have 1x unearthly, 1x high magical and 3x brilliant and I could afford better, which is ridiculous and that's my point. you receive more money than me so I assume you have roughly the same staff.
so basically after probably 1 year, 1.5 year of playing you were already able to afford everything in the game, including big enough stadium etc., while not even reaching a really high level with the team. the economics in the game are simply broken.
ps. there's not much difference between our leagues though, average rating of yours was 56 and mine 53. It might be IInd but in terms of level its around Polish Vth.
(edited)
I have 1x unearthly, 1x high magical and 3x brilliant and I could afford better, which is ridiculous and that's my point. you receive more money than me so I assume you have roughly the same staff.
so basically after probably 1 year, 1.5 year of playing you were already able to afford everything in the game, including big enough stadium etc., while not even reaching a really high level with the team. the economics in the game are simply broken.
ps. there's not much difference between our leagues though, average rating of yours was 56 and mine 53. It might be IInd but in terms of level its around Polish Vth.
(edited)
+1 for everything you said about the economy.
The balance between transfer activity and results-based revenue is completely broken, which is why farming is the solution for so many teams.
IMO one of the ways to counter that is much higher taxes on net profits from transfers, regardless of how long a player has been with the team. This way farming won’t be as profitable, and huge amount of money will be burned, which will lower market prices and make ticket revenue (i.e. results) more significant.
The balance between transfer activity and results-based revenue is completely broken, which is why farming is the solution for so many teams.
IMO one of the ways to counter that is much higher taxes on net profits from transfers, regardless of how long a player has been with the team. This way farming won’t be as profitable, and huge amount of money will be burned, which will lower market prices and make ticket revenue (i.e. results) more significant.
Exactly. If I can make 200% in only transfers profit of what a team in highest Polish league makes in whole income from season then it is just broken. I can make much more in lowest league while also having much lower expenditure (much lower player wages, less players).
High profit taxes would be a good move, I agree, but I'm sure it would be very unpopular at the same time. Probably the ticket income should be lowered as well - in fact I think that tickets are the part of the game that can impact the economy in easiest way to bring inflation / deflation. Taxes would mainly make the process faster.
High profit taxes would be a good move, I agree, but I'm sure it would be very unpopular at the same time. Probably the ticket income should be lowered as well - in fact I think that tickets are the part of the game that can impact the economy in easiest way to bring inflation / deflation. Taxes would mainly make the process faster.
Yeah but I think the reduction in ticket revenue will hurt the average Joe more. And it will also be extremely unpopular, especially when they try to explain that this will actually make the results more significant in the long term :D (even though true but counterintuitive)
On the other hand, the downside of higher fees will be less activity on the market.
On the other hand, the downside of higher fees will be less activity on the market.
ps. there's not much difference between our leagues though, average rating of yours was 56 and mine 53. It might be IInd but in terms of level its around Polish Vth.
We have same conditions in few ranks difference. Probably as your opponents can afford better team in 5th league as my league colleagues in 2nd league.
I have this team rating as my main team is 7x21y and 3x19y except keeper.
I did what I did as I have 10+ years of Sokker expirience. Did I cheated? No.
I have 1x 16, 3x ~35k magical and high magical as junior coach and I bought weaker players to play with, as I can't afford wages for better ones if I don't play 1st league. Easy.
(edited)
We have same conditions in few ranks difference. Probably as your opponents can afford better team in 5th league as my league colleagues in 2nd league.
I have this team rating as my main team is 7x21y and 3x19y except keeper.
I did what I did as I have 10+ years of Sokker expirience. Did I cheated? No.
I have 1x 16, 3x ~35k magical and high magical as junior coach and I bought weaker players to play with, as I can't afford wages for better ones if I don't play 1st league. Easy.
(edited)
It is true, it might feel like an attack on big teams because relatively they will lose the most money from tickets because they earn the most, but at the same time all of their "surplus" big money from tickets then goes down to training teams and to farming teams. So they indirectly finance the teams from lower levels. If they have less money, then they have less money to pay for transfers, if they pay less then the prices drop down, if prices drop down then also the profit for training goes down.
But overall for it to work I believe they would have to connect most countries (small-medium) into a single International league because if we base the teams strenght on tickets/sponsors without ability to make up for lower income via training profit, then it simply can't work in countries that have less than full 2 divisions of user-active leagues. If you go down from 1st league and play against bots then it can't work, the income will be too low.
Honestly at this point I don't really see an issue with creating one big league for all teams in the game, but that's a different story.
@2posto
Nobody says you cheated, as I've said I have similar staff and earn a bit less, but that's the issue since both of us can make much more because we can train youngsters etc. and make profit on that training, while teams at higher level have bigger expenses, can't really make that training profit money and earn only a bit more from tickets/sponsors.
(edited)
But overall for it to work I believe they would have to connect most countries (small-medium) into a single International league because if we base the teams strenght on tickets/sponsors without ability to make up for lower income via training profit, then it simply can't work in countries that have less than full 2 divisions of user-active leagues. If you go down from 1st league and play against bots then it can't work, the income will be too low.
Honestly at this point I don't really see an issue with creating one big league for all teams in the game, but that's a different story.
@2posto
Nobody says you cheated, as I've said I have similar staff and earn a bit less, but that's the issue since both of us can make much more because we can train youngsters etc. and make profit on that training, while teams at higher level have bigger expenses, can't really make that training profit money and earn only a bit more from tickets/sponsors.
(edited)
Although I have a working theory that the teams responsible for raised prices might actually be those "middle level" teams who have lower expenditure due to "normal wages" yet earn similar money to top teams (the difference between 1st and 3rd league in Poland is really not big in terms on sponsors/tickets) and by teams that have very low expenditure, don't train players with good coaches, don't invest much in youth school etc. and then just spend most of their income on transfers.
Top teams I think rarely make a surplus in terms of income/expenditure due to high wages so it's kind of tricky to establish where exactly is the money that should be decreased.
Top teams I think rarely make a surplus in terms of income/expenditure due to high wages so it's kind of tricky to establish where exactly is the money that should be decreased.
@2posto
Nobody says you cheated, as I've said I have similar staff and earn a bit less, but that's the issue since both of us can make much more because we can train youngsters etc. and make profit on that training, while teams at higher level have bigger expenses, can't really make that training profit money and earn only a bit more from tickets/sponsors.
Not meant in a bad way! I said it like it is possible to do it even in bad circumstances with low-average attendance. Obviously ticket income isn't our main source of profit and probably it isn't what makes teams rich... If I had 14 NT-quality players - 550-700k/w only for players salaries and in league like mine it is nearly imposible to finance both - good coaches and those players.
With more taxes I can actually live. I'm not trader, or short term trainer - till now my goal was +1M player market value per season.
Seems greatest problem of Sokker is number of active users! Without enough mid-teams, market have void as noone is buying average-good players anymore and we have price extremes: 15 buyers for top, 1-2 for good player.
Second I meant, it shouldn't be privilege to have good coaches in 2nd league. My goal is to play for championship in few seasons ahead, and I choosed to do it with better coaches and with budget players, like I always do (44M invested + 2 my own). This is similar like options you suggested in this or another topic.
(edited)
Nobody says you cheated, as I've said I have similar staff and earn a bit less, but that's the issue since both of us can make much more because we can train youngsters etc. and make profit on that training, while teams at higher level have bigger expenses, can't really make that training profit money and earn only a bit more from tickets/sponsors.
Not meant in a bad way! I said it like it is possible to do it even in bad circumstances with low-average attendance. Obviously ticket income isn't our main source of profit and probably it isn't what makes teams rich... If I had 14 NT-quality players - 550-700k/w only for players salaries and in league like mine it is nearly imposible to finance both - good coaches and those players.
With more taxes I can actually live. I'm not trader, or short term trainer - till now my goal was +1M player market value per season.
Seems greatest problem of Sokker is number of active users! Without enough mid-teams, market have void as noone is buying average-good players anymore and we have price extremes: 15 buyers for top, 1-2 for good player.
Second I meant, it shouldn't be privilege to have good coaches in 2nd league. My goal is to play for championship in few seasons ahead, and I choosed to do it with better coaches and with budget players, like I always do (44M invested + 2 my own). This is similar like options you suggested in this or another topic.
(edited)