Azərbaycan dili Bahasa Indonesia Bosanski Català Čeština Dansk Deutsch Eesti English Español Français Galego Hrvatski Italiano Latviešu Lietuvių Magyar Malti Mакедонски Nederlands Norsk Polski Português Português BR Românã Slovenčina Srpski Suomi Svenska Tiếng Việt Türkçe Ελληνικά Български Русский Українська Հայերեն ქართული ენა 中文
Subpage under development, new version coming soon!

Subject: [idea] Automatic sale players of team bot

2024-08-21 21:25:38
the ideas to put players of inactive teams on TL automatically at the end of season or in the middle of it are known to devs, just nothing was done in this direction
2024-08-21 23:30:59
The question was what YOU think if it, not what owners think of it...

The second question after is off course how much of a difference it will make if you think it's a good idea...
2024-08-22 00:09:26
It's obviously a good idea and we have it already on the list since some time.
The question is bit "if", but how and when.

There are some details that have to be researched and than we need to wait until backend-dev will have a time for that.

But personly, I will push first to use backend-dev time to work on injuries and youth school. If I would have a choice listing players has lower priority.
2024-08-22 00:32:34
Injuries and youth school?

Hell yes, this is my vote.
2024-08-22 00:44:21
Who said you would like the changes? :)

But stay calm, no work has started yet.
2024-08-22 06:02:33
I'm not a programmer, but wouldn't the injury changes be fairly simple? I mean, depending on what you wanted to do. Like, if you wanted to reduce the time by 40%, but increase the frequency by 20%, these are probably not complicated formulas. It's math and rng.

the youth school though, now THAT is a long term project
2024-08-22 06:19:57
This proposal is much easier to program then youth school

I think half season is good so the young players dont miss too much training
2024-08-22 07:56:01
Until they're willing to start the YS reform one day, it would be nice to simply remove the 18-year-old arrivals. Shouldn't take more than 10 minutes. Better than nothing.
2024-08-22 08:01:37
You realise how big of an impact would that have?

Now you can get ages: 16, 17, 18

So 33% for 16, 33% for 17, 33% for 18

You would increase the chance of 16 to 50%, it would have very big consequences
2024-08-22 08:45:00
So? Will anyone regret it?
2024-08-22 08:59:09
Will anyone regret if they get 25 million euro? No.

Will anyone regret if they change talent of all players to under 4? No.

Will anyone regret if they get magical youth 5 times a season?

Will it be good for the game? No.
2024-08-22 09:03:27
Your logic is very balanced... no
2024-08-22 09:15:57
More balanced then your response sorry. Borkos is right here. Just because people like something doesn't mean it's the right move for a game to make and this is one of them. We might not like it but I think it's a necessity.

I mean otherwise you may as well give everyone all perfect skilled players, no money in the game and just play simulations for matches. Like where do you draw the line.

There has to be control over the quality of top end players and this is the only way to do that.

We already see people want training separate from matches, next to no injuries or when they do occur to be like 1 match and also for training to be given despite being injured.

Everything people want is so they can use perfect players, so let's just go the full way and give them that. No money, no injuries, no training and perfect players (I mean that's what people are basically saying they want).
(edited)
2024-08-22 09:20:48
No it's not. There's still room for imrpovements, like extra skills, making training harder on top level, talent...
But having much more well balanced trainees is something everyone will benefit from. Skill distribution is still completely random
2024-08-22 09:22:53
You realise how big of an impact would that have?

No, he doesn't but tries to promote his solution for YS reform each time he has the opportunity to do it.
(edited)
2024-08-22 09:26:52
Still, such change could be done with additional limiting weekly number of juniors from 1-6 to e.g. 1-4. Improvement, but to a lesser degree.