Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: »[info]Dev Diary #82: Automatic release of NT-players from
The easy way to make it as you say (weak teams can build a bank balance season after season, get to the top, but not stay for long) is to link transfer price to wage.
Every player has a set wage like they do now, but their wage also goes up based on how much they sold for, say, 1%.
So If I buy a player with a wage of $10,000 and I spend $3,000,000 than his new wage at my team is $40,000. Causes money to leave the game AND allows me to work within my budget.
Then at the top end, that 3x SD striker. Wage is $40,000 costs $18,000,000 so new wage is $220,000 per week. This will help remove money from the game, whilst allowing people to still buy the best. And as money in the game reduces, the cost of the above player reduces, and so does the wage, to be more in line with other factors such as sponsorship and gate receipts.
The other great side effect of this is it will promote people training youths. Either you pull a good youth and because he is from your youth school, the wage is very low, or you buy the youth for cheap and train up, again allowing you to have a great player at a low price, and then for those absolutely wonderful youths that sell for a lot, they then get trained properly or sold because it cost a lot to keep them on weekly.
This idea is a win in all directions and has been suggest many times over the years by different people
Every player has a set wage like they do now, but their wage also goes up based on how much they sold for, say, 1%.
So If I buy a player with a wage of $10,000 and I spend $3,000,000 than his new wage at my team is $40,000. Causes money to leave the game AND allows me to work within my budget.
Then at the top end, that 3x SD striker. Wage is $40,000 costs $18,000,000 so new wage is $220,000 per week. This will help remove money from the game, whilst allowing people to still buy the best. And as money in the game reduces, the cost of the above player reduces, and so does the wage, to be more in line with other factors such as sponsorship and gate receipts.
The other great side effect of this is it will promote people training youths. Either you pull a good youth and because he is from your youth school, the wage is very low, or you buy the youth for cheap and train up, again allowing you to have a great player at a low price, and then for those absolutely wonderful youths that sell for a lot, they then get trained properly or sold because it cost a lot to keep them on weekly.
This idea is a win in all directions and has been suggest many times over the years by different people
If you have an extremely productive youth school and you don't have to buy other players, than you're in luck :p
Impossible idea, but creative thinking :D
Impossible idea, but creative thinking :D
That would lead to great/top youths going only into farm teams that don't care about the price/wages
"-sponsorship is based on the number of fans... penalize small teams,"
Spot on, and this is what hurts small users and small countries.
Everything is based on number of fans of yourself or your league, which seems like a good idea, until you realise that small nations, who have no more leagues to go up, are being affected by bots base level of 200 fans.
If there is just 1 bot in Division 1, by itself it drops everything 8% (1 in 12).
This also means that in the division 2, where other human users may have dropped, are also full of bots. So that 1 human user is reduced 92% for a season (11/12), which when they auto promote, than has an affect on all the Division 1 teams.
As the number of users in a country grows, this affect on the top division is reduced. For each level down, the affect is 1/12. So if you can fill 2 divisions except for one youth, the affect on the top division is 1/12 of 1/12 = 1/144. Less than 1%.
And why do I use top division as an example? Because everyone in that league has the opportunity to get there. But in small countries, you don't have the opportunity to go higher. Your growth in the game is then dependent on others joining sokker and staying in sokker rather than anything you can do. And this is not fair on those managers at all, getting put in a situation where you cannot do anything to improve your position other than wait in the game long enough that hopefully people join and stay, when in reality, it is opposite, people are leaving the game, so you actually get weaker over time in small countries
Spot on, and this is what hurts small users and small countries.
Everything is based on number of fans of yourself or your league, which seems like a good idea, until you realise that small nations, who have no more leagues to go up, are being affected by bots base level of 200 fans.
If there is just 1 bot in Division 1, by itself it drops everything 8% (1 in 12).
This also means that in the division 2, where other human users may have dropped, are also full of bots. So that 1 human user is reduced 92% for a season (11/12), which when they auto promote, than has an affect on all the Division 1 teams.
As the number of users in a country grows, this affect on the top division is reduced. For each level down, the affect is 1/12. So if you can fill 2 divisions except for one youth, the affect on the top division is 1/12 of 1/12 = 1/144. Less than 1%.
And why do I use top division as an example? Because everyone in that league has the opportunity to get there. But in small countries, you don't have the opportunity to go higher. Your growth in the game is then dependent on others joining sokker and staying in sokker rather than anything you can do. And this is not fair on those managers at all, getting put in a situation where you cannot do anything to improve your position other than wait in the game long enough that hopefully people join and stay, when in reality, it is opposite, people are leaving the game, so you actually get weaker over time in small countries
"I dont agree.
My logic is simple:
To show the skills is the right option, for the right things u dont need to check boxes.
To not show is a bad decision, and for that u need to find the box and to check it."
Completely agree. The default should be to show skills.
Then if someone doesn't want to show skills, they have to actively hide them with the check box
My logic is simple:
To show the skills is the right option, for the right things u dont need to check boxes.
To not show is a bad decision, and for that u need to find the box and to check it."
Completely agree. The default should be to show skills.
Then if someone doesn't want to show skills, they have to actively hide them with the check box
Farm teams wouldn't survive because they wouldn't be able to have the income for long to maintain it (if they overspend on the TL).
If they don't overspend, then it opens the door for non-farm teams.
I see where you are going for sure, and I think in the short term, there would be youths going to farm teams, but long term, people don't want to spend time on farm teams, therefore they don't manage them correctly, they overspend on the TL and then the wages get too high for them to keep the youth and they need to sell, which would actually help remove farm teams from the game
If they don't overspend, then it opens the door for non-farm teams.
I see where you are going for sure, and I think in the short term, there would be youths going to farm teams, but long term, people don't want to spend time on farm teams, therefore they don't manage them correctly, they overspend on the TL and then the wages get too high for them to keep the youth and they need to sell, which would actually help remove farm teams from the game
Raul to sviktorov
no idea how you can point that stadium income reduction is a bad decision.
are you joking? of course, is a bad decision did you ever play this game seriously ever? do you how hard is to build your stadium?
you just coming in forum and telling people that in 2 weeks they are fucked with big stadiums :) can you imagine how that feels?
Last seasons it was just an extra money, it cant stay that way. We will just get back to the start, nothing more.
You managed in that game for many years with lower incomes, that is not a problem at all.
with the "extra money" i always have money but never can find or buy the player i want. before i was easier with no money to fit the gaps... but of course you always forget that with the shortening of the season, you cut us 3 weeks 10 slots of training and do not get me started on the injuries and their increased probability with 2 games per week ...
do you forget that now players have a short life with the short season?
so basically the issue is that we lack quality players...
inflation on market is not because people have more money from last few seasonon it is cause still there is wide trading and some teams has saved money from the past and kept market prices high..
for users that try to compete on all fronts cup championship and CL and that keep large squads you just telling them do not try it
and do not get me started on NT aspect and how increased wages will affect people that train 10 NT slots ..
no idea how you can point that stadium income reduction is a bad decision.
are you joking? of course, is a bad decision did you ever play this game seriously ever? do you how hard is to build your stadium?
you just coming in forum and telling people that in 2 weeks they are fucked with big stadiums :) can you imagine how that feels?
Last seasons it was just an extra money, it cant stay that way. We will just get back to the start, nothing more.
You managed in that game for many years with lower incomes, that is not a problem at all.
with the "extra money" i always have money but never can find or buy the player i want. before i was easier with no money to fit the gaps... but of course you always forget that with the shortening of the season, you cut us 3 weeks 10 slots of training and do not get me started on the injuries and their increased probability with 2 games per week ...
do you forget that now players have a short life with the short season?
so basically the issue is that we lack quality players...
inflation on market is not because people have more money from last few seasonon it is cause still there is wide trading and some teams has saved money from the past and kept market prices high..
for users that try to compete on all fronts cup championship and CL and that keep large squads you just telling them do not try it
and do not get me started on NT aspect and how increased wages will affect people that train 10 NT slots ..
@Raul you just have to accept that you cannot equal the game for new users and users that play 10-15 years without unfair decisions....
only possible way is to reset the game and start from scratch but im not sure if you mention this that will happen anyone will stay here ..
only possible way is to reset the game and start from scratch but im not sure if you mention this that will happen anyone will stay here ..
I assume by button you mean checkbox. Remember to make it ticked by default, otherwise it would be a bit useless, as 90% of users won't even touch it.
Yes, exactly.
About developmend speed…
20% in 3 years is 20% more than we could expect 4 years ago. We have our limits, but hopefully we will get to 100% finally. We started from quite difficult pages, it should be easier with most of the rest.
Yes, exactly.
About developmend speed…
20% in 3 years is 20% more than we could expect 4 years ago. We have our limits, but hopefully we will get to 100% finally. We started from quite difficult pages, it should be easier with most of the rest.
There is no such a thing like lack of quality players in sokker :) it is quite opposite.
Interesting idea - my concern is about young players, for now training is cheap - you can invest in young prospects and you dont have to much weekly costs, you can start to chase better teams.
For sure there should be also a way to reduce wage, np when player is getting old and worse.
For sure there should be also a way to reduce wage, np when player is getting old and worse.
Why don't users want to play games anymore even with all these new important settings? There are 8000 users, a very low number And I think there are 4000 active ones, even if there's been a bug for a year in the "online users" section.
It was obvious because the best clubs have the biggest stadiums,
since you have added 4 home matches in a shorter season through the reform,
it was foreseeable that the best clubs would have
4*(0.5-1) million euros,
i.e. 2-4 million euros of income from stadiums
since you have added 4 home matches in a shorter season through the reform,
it was foreseeable that the best clubs would have
4*(0.5-1) million euros,
i.e. 2-4 million euros of income from stadiums
At the start game economy should help you to develop. When you are close to the top, it should be difficult. Your balance should be close to 0, and game should be harder.
I understand this approach. But where is the change proposed by the devs in that now play to win would be more important? What is the message to all users that you tell them that reaching the first division will only mean losing money. even if they win? I do not understand that.
You say: the top teams earn an extra 7 million each season and the weak 200,000. but now more games are played per week, there is more risk of injury and if you are a top team you have more cup games, maybe champions cup games, your players will play with their NT, That is, much more risk of injury. You need more players in your club. They also age faster. only in 13 weeks instead of 16.
If you are a top team, you need substitute players, it is much more expensive than a substitute for a weak team.
therefore, I understand that if you are a top team, earning an extra 7 million is too much. but winning 0 doesn't seem fair to me either. And what happens if you are a first division team but you are last classificated? you just lose money? The good teams, but not that good, will not be interested in moving up to the first level if they only lose money. they will give up competing to save more money. just the opposite of what the devs intended from the beginning
I understand that a team at the highest level should not get an extra 7 million each season. We have all noticed the increase in income. But I also understand that the balance should not be close to 0 either. Because the balance, before the league reform, was not close to 0 either. It was positive but lower. Maybe + 2 million on average between all the first division teams? And now we know that the new competition system will also require more spending. therefore, rather than a balance close to 0, we should speak of a balance close to +3 or 4 million euros.
That would be a little more logical. otherwise, we run the risk that a new update will again be a popular clamor from users and it will have to be corrected again
(edited)
I understand this approach. But where is the change proposed by the devs in that now play to win would be more important? What is the message to all users that you tell them that reaching the first division will only mean losing money. even if they win? I do not understand that.
You say: the top teams earn an extra 7 million each season and the weak 200,000. but now more games are played per week, there is more risk of injury and if you are a top team you have more cup games, maybe champions cup games, your players will play with their NT, That is, much more risk of injury. You need more players in your club. They also age faster. only in 13 weeks instead of 16.
If you are a top team, you need substitute players, it is much more expensive than a substitute for a weak team.
therefore, I understand that if you are a top team, earning an extra 7 million is too much. but winning 0 doesn't seem fair to me either. And what happens if you are a first division team but you are last classificated? you just lose money? The good teams, but not that good, will not be interested in moving up to the first level if they only lose money. they will give up competing to save more money. just the opposite of what the devs intended from the beginning
I understand that a team at the highest level should not get an extra 7 million each season. We have all noticed the increase in income. But I also understand that the balance should not be close to 0 either. Because the balance, before the league reform, was not close to 0 either. It was positive but lower. Maybe + 2 million on average between all the first division teams? And now we know that the new competition system will also require more spending. therefore, rather than a balance close to 0, we should speak of a balance close to +3 or 4 million euros.
That would be a little more logical. otherwise, we run the risk that a new update will again be a popular clamor from users and it will have to be corrected again
(edited)
I understand this approach. But where is the change proposed by the devs in that now play to win would be more important? What is the message to all users that you tell them that reaching the first division will only mean losing money. even if they win? I do not understand that.
There is still a work to do with for example prizes (we can or example replace seasonal bonus with some system of prizes linked to your final possition in league), same with funclub mood - we can also make some system that will not hurt teams after promotion - if you are first time in high div, your supporters should be still happy from this result and dont judge you even if you are on 8-9 possition, still it would be the best result for your club history. We will search for some solution of "seasonal expectations" that will set goals for our team in terms of its real strenght, not only number of won matches.
I agree, that top clubs should have a chance to get possitive balance. But still, we need to remember that balance is dependend on costs. If you decide to have 5x unearthly coaches and 20 top players in your club, and 10 juniors to train too - well, i dont get why you should be still on plus then. We cant leave a system when everyone can afford everything. Currently, if unearthly coaches would be easy to find problably all of you would hire as many as you can. That is not normal situation. No real clubs can afford 5x Murinhios.
There is still a work to do with for example prizes (we can or example replace seasonal bonus with some system of prizes linked to your final possition in league), same with funclub mood - we can also make some system that will not hurt teams after promotion - if you are first time in high div, your supporters should be still happy from this result and dont judge you even if you are on 8-9 possition, still it would be the best result for your club history. We will search for some solution of "seasonal expectations" that will set goals for our team in terms of its real strenght, not only number of won matches.
I agree, that top clubs should have a chance to get possitive balance. But still, we need to remember that balance is dependend on costs. If you decide to have 5x unearthly coaches and 20 top players in your club, and 10 juniors to train too - well, i dont get why you should be still on plus then. We cant leave a system when everyone can afford everything. Currently, if unearthly coaches would be easy to find problably all of you would hire as many as you can. That is not normal situation. No real clubs can afford 5x Murinhios.
