Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: »[info]Dev Diary #82: Automatic release of NT-players from
Fixed 4 weeks restriction is indeed controversial I would prefer something like 200-250' played in official games.
Some limit should exist, the one that is in place now doesn't work.
Some limit should exist, the one that is in place now doesn't work.
Tighten the conditions under which a player may agree to be sold.
The number of minimum games played in team: 2
increasing rapidly when there are sales in last 2 weeks (except of own juniors) up to 8
This both restricts the traders but allows people to be flexible in managing their team.
Under the new restriction you won´t be able to sell players in this situations (among others)
1) Sometimes you buy a 16yr who doesn't pop from tragic in 2 weeks, his talent is horrible
2) You buy a +30y player and he gets injured for 30days
3) Your player gets injured/red card and you need a substitituion but after that you dont need the player anymore
4) a friend asks you if you can buy a player and resell the player to him after he sells some player and have enough money
Is it really hard to see that this restriction is insensitive and does not punish only traders? Where is your common sense?
The number of minimum games played in team: 2
increasing rapidly when there are sales in last 2 weeks (except of own juniors) up to 8
This both restricts the traders but allows people to be flexible in managing their team.
Under the new restriction you won´t be able to sell players in this situations (among others)
1) Sometimes you buy a 16yr who doesn't pop from tragic in 2 weeks, his talent is horrible
2) You buy a +30y player and he gets injured for 30days
3) Your player gets injured/red card and you need a substitituion but after that you dont need the player anymore
4) a friend asks you if you can buy a player and resell the player to him after he sells some player and have enough money
Is it really hard to see that this restriction is insensitive and does not punish only traders? Where is your common sense?
I don't see it as a "punishment" but as a new rule we have to get to use.
at the beginning it will be strange maybe.
it could also be done in other ways, such as a minimum of 4 friendly/official games minimum. They chose so. it's ok. if I had chosen I would have added also the maximum number of players in the team, the maximum number of trades per season and strong tax reselling :-P
at the beginning it will be strange maybe.
it could also be done in other ways, such as a minimum of 4 friendly/official games minimum. They chose so. it's ok. if I had chosen I would have added also the maximum number of players in the team, the maximum number of trades per season and strong tax reselling :-P
you are right, i just read the announcement again and I see that they want to implement something no one asked for. So it is not about problems with trading but about enforcing certain game style to everyone
Buying player for one game is rather a bug from our perspective... There is no interest for wide squad today in sokker, and 4 weeks period is a bit motivating for more carefull planning.
It's quite logic, that you shouldnt be able to resell any player too fast. With 4 weeks it gives a chance to play in 3 different clubs per season - and its a lot.
And as we mentioned - just check your last transfers - probably 99% of them under the 4 weeks condition was for trading.
It's quite logic, that you shouldnt be able to resell any player too fast. With 4 weeks it gives a chance to play in 3 different clubs per season - and its a lot.
And as we mentioned - just check your last transfers - probably 99% of them under the 4 weeks condition was for trading.
some old players I bought at the end of the season but then I changed my mind and went for full training - not for trading
some I bought by mistake, when I wanted just to follow the player and no one overbid me - not for trading
players bought solely for trading were a minority, not 99%
some I bought by mistake, when I wanted just to follow the player and no one overbid me - not for trading
players bought solely for trading were a minority, not 99%
adding more official games during the week and shortening the season means that managers have to be more flexible in their strategic planning. But you restrict the flexibility. Those two changes are contradictory.
Currently there are teams with 11 good players only, with no reserve players at all (just buing new players only when someone is injuried)- its a bug, if 4 weeks period will affect that too, its in our opinion good for the game.
Thats tour decission how much risk you want to take, and this rule will be for everyone (as Rebel said), so seriously, i dont get where the problem is.
Thats tour decission how much risk you want to take, and this rule will be for everyone (as Rebel said), so seriously, i dont get where the problem is.
Dont worry there is no problem.
Slavista will just have to be more careful when he bid...
Slavista will just have to be more careful when he bid...
lol buying player for a game is a bug ....
then 3 injuries and 2 red cards is a bug too why not focus on that too
then 3 injuries and 2 red cards is a bug too why not focus on that too
Never said that.
bug is playing without any reserve players.
And selling player after one game.
(edited)
bug is playing without any reserve players.
And selling player after one game.
(edited)
did you ever thought that those teams cannot afford more players was the idea weak team to catch faster rich teams not to make rich teams stronger with this rule you cut possibility more teams to compete for championship
Buying player for one game is rather a bug from our perspective...
read your post above
(edited)
read your post above
(edited)
While i agree that it would be better if it would be 4(instead of yours 2) games played than 4 weeks in the team, but lets look at your points.
1) Sometimes you buy a 16yr who doesn't pop from tragic in 2 weeks, his talent is horrible
Juniors with horrible talent will not have high skillsum -> no one will buy them -> sacking them is better option.
Also 2 weeks => that can be 6 games already.
2) You buy a +30y player and he gets injured for 30days
If you sell injured player he goes for less. Its better to wait till he is fit.
Also in real life you cant sell injured player, because he wont pass medical.
3) Your player gets injured/red card and you need a substitituion but after that you dont need the player anymore
You buy a better replacement and sell your old player (after he sits his card/injury out)
4) a friend asks you if you can buy a player and resell the player to him after he sells some player and have enough money
There are no friends in business :D
Also looks like it is against fair play.
1) Sometimes you buy a 16yr who doesn't pop from tragic in 2 weeks, his talent is horrible
Juniors with horrible talent will not have high skillsum -> no one will buy them -> sacking them is better option.
Also 2 weeks => that can be 6 games already.
2) You buy a +30y player and he gets injured for 30days
If you sell injured player he goes for less. Its better to wait till he is fit.
Also in real life you cant sell injured player, because he wont pass medical.
3) Your player gets injured/red card and you need a substitituion but after that you dont need the player anymore
You buy a better replacement and sell your old player (after he sits his card/injury out)
4) a friend asks you if you can buy a player and resell the player to him after he sells some player and have enough money
There are no friends in business :D
Also looks like it is against fair play.
Buying player for one game is rather a bug from our perspective... There is no interest for wide squad today in sokker, and 4 weeks period is a bit motivating for more carefull planning.
If you want teams to have wider squads you'd have to make bigger changes. There are not many injuries or suspensions and players at the top end are fairly expensive, so it's simply not worth buying a striker or goalkeeper for a few million just for the bench. The 4 week rule won't change that. It will only punish teams more for injuries when they have to buy a player and keep him for 4 weeks. (I'm not against the 4 week rule, but I think the main issue is trading and there are better ways to prevent that.)
To encourage managers to have wider squads there'd have be more injuries and suspensions, but I suspect that wouldn't be a popular change. One thing you could do is make form change more quickly, so for example it could make sense to have 3 strikers and let the 2 in better form play. At the moment that's pointless because players will often stay in low form for 2 seasons or more (which should be changed anyway). But in general it would take big changes to the game economy to make wider squads useful, which would be a different topic altogether.
If you want teams to have wider squads you'd have to make bigger changes. There are not many injuries or suspensions and players at the top end are fairly expensive, so it's simply not worth buying a striker or goalkeeper for a few million just for the bench. The 4 week rule won't change that. It will only punish teams more for injuries when they have to buy a player and keep him for 4 weeks. (I'm not against the 4 week rule, but I think the main issue is trading and there are better ways to prevent that.)
To encourage managers to have wider squads there'd have be more injuries and suspensions, but I suspect that wouldn't be a popular change. One thing you could do is make form change more quickly, so for example it could make sense to have 3 strikers and let the 2 in better form play. At the moment that's pointless because players will often stay in low form for 2 seasons or more (which should be changed anyway). But in general it would take big changes to the game economy to make wider squads useful, which would be a different topic altogether.