| Forum » General » -20% avg Rule Poll | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Do you agree with the -20%avg rule for free-gained players during inter-season?
|
||
|
Username
45 msgs.
Child's coach
|
I'm talking about playmoney.. Divide it in an exponential way | 20/06/2011 17:23 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
221 msgs.
Substitute
|
@Rand said: Romasik2000 said: Also... Admins, remember that this game is not for you but for the players (I'm a paying customer) and at the moment big majority of them don't agree with your decision.... think about it. Edited by Romasik2000 20-06-2011 15:56 100% agree. Thanks. The problem for you, is that you are the minority. We won't allow a few of you, actually, it's only 287 users who got a player for free, to make the game unfair for the rest, who is a vast majority. ( There are 18.000 teams ). We're doing this for the sake of the fairness of the game. Nothing more. 18000 teams - yes.... But how many active players? Still quite a lot more than 287. That's for sure. Ok, but if the rest of the active teams did not want to use their resources to search and sign free agents how is that my fault? Look it like this way: A country is run by it's government, those are the people who run the country on a daily basis. A country is also ruled by a king or president. The inhabitants of a country (thousands of them) are not a lot involved in managing the country. Those 287 managers can be seen as the government, since they form the most active part of the game. Without them, not much would happen in the game -> it would be boring -> a lot of other managers would drop out (*)(leaving the country if you will). So it would be better for the admins (the presidents) to take the heart of this game (the government) into account! (*) this is what happened last season, and will happen again Edited by Cultif 20-06-2011 17:25 |
20/06/2011 17:23 |
| Kings XI Punjab - Div1/Gr1 | ||
|
Username
45 msgs.
Child's coach
|
inertia said: @internat said: Sorry I haven't been able to answer this thread yet, but I've some time now. I haven't read all the messages in this thread so maybe some of the things I'll say may have been already discussed. We had this season a situation that we haven't had faced before. As you know this server has been growing a lot in users in the last few weeks, I don't have here the exact numbers but, we've got almost 50.000 new users in the last season. Each of these users get a new team, counting an average of 30 new players per team, that's 1.500.000 new players. Most of these new user never connect again after the first try, so their players never get re-signed. After ending the season there were 30.000 players that had ended his contract. Usually there are at the most 1.000 free players at the end of any other season, so we offer this players in auction, so all teams can get some benefit of these players. This season that procedure got totally out of control with that huge amount of players. People bought in auction players they need but after the auction ended a lot of good players went free so everyone could buy them. We think this situation is unfair. Some teams have totally renewed their squad with players ranging an average between 55-70, at no cost. We didn't want to cause too much harm to both, teams who bought free players and teams who didn't. We have discused many options as authomatically fire all these players, or put a fine to the teams. The final solution, we think is the least harmful to all managers. We took note of what happened this season and this won't happen again. I hope this explains why we took this decision. You call that a BUG ? How is this a Bug ? This is a situation. Best left alone than this mindless action. at max reduce 5%, why 20% ? I gave my goalkeeper away for cheap, cos i thought i thought i have a got a good player. Now i am not gonna get that back, Am i ? Did u even think about consequences or how this action is going to hurt the most active users of striker manager ? How about those GBs we spent on coaching sect. You are not gonna give them back now ? Are you ? PLaymoney is exactly what I mean... And if the prices are fair (not overrated or underrated), all the problems are solved, and everybody is happy  |
20/06/2011 17:27 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
140 msgs.
Substitute
|
michaelowen said: why should i grow up!! just mind ur own fcking biz!! even if it is a home game, let me ask u, how many home game are there in a week? earn just 600k in 1 week if there is only 1 home game in a week? how many player can i sell den mother-fcker ? sell those good player and buy those lower avg to train and den lose on the games again n again? and den forever stay in div 6!!! Amazing how we've been playing for basically the same amount of time and yet you still have trouble managing finances. paus united said: I'm talking about playmoney.. Divide it in an exponential way I like the idea for sure but that raises other questions. What about those players that users choose not to pay to raise their average? Chances are that they'll be auctioned for additional funds. Will they still have the ability to raise their average or will they simply be stuck as is permanently excluding training/age? If they do keep their ability to raise their average, then how many people would pay extra money to only spend more raising the other player. Might be more cost-efficient to buy a player of a higher original average. Also, how long would we keep this ability for? Lots of questions, but again, good basis for fixing it. |
20/06/2011 17:38 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
997 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Frantiiiiic said: Problem aswell is that these managers are the most active players in the game, and THEY are the ones keeping this game alive, not the guys that are online once a week or even less... Agreed, It's really upsetting, when I'm on this game every day, working on my team, trying to make it better. My biggest problem is that the players that were signed are the player that noone wanted to buy. Not like we got them for free when someone else had a bid posted for them. True, there were lots of good players, but it's the end of the season, there are always lots of good players available. It just pisses me off that I get punished for signing free agents after noone wanted to buy them. And now I'm getting punished for a so called "bug" when all I did is signed free agents. |
20/06/2011 17:40 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
104 msgs.
Substitute
|
well,after renew some of my player i didn´t know the solution wasn´t so bad actually i think all of us should be happy. I thought our players were turning from 50 to 32 but that was because of the moral and energy...Some people might be not happy as they paid a lot for a player who decrease because of someone who got advantage of the situation but most of us win with this situation i signed sever players 50 av that now is 44 which is not so bad at all, I want to apologise to all @´s i could offense i think the solution is not so bad and not everybody can be happy but that´s the way it is decreasin 4 points or 6 is not so bad besides some players are young and will get better with training so , what´s the big deal ?¿ i didn´t realised that until i renew some contracts and saw the real AV i am very bad at mats  D thank´s @ and sorry for all |
20/06/2011 17:42 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
580 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
@shengli said: Do you want my opinion? I didn't sign ANY free player, because I knew there was something which was wrong with that. I only signed a free defender by mistake because it appeared in the secretary coach and wanted to test if it was possible to sign senior players for free in that way, and when I saw it was possible I decided to fire him at the moment. As @Rand said, it had no sense that a 71 defender was on auction at 125 millions and was signed FOR FREE after it. That spoils the whole game, and it's obvious that now something must be done. When I saw I was able to sign all those players for free, I decided to sign any of them, because I knew that later that could bring problems to me. All of you should have done the same, I think. Some of you suggest to put the stamina and morale to 0, and with all my respect, it seems a totally self-seeking suggestion. What about later? two weeks later and after paying a miserable amount of money you will have again your 60 average players FOR FREE, when many users have paid millions and millions to get them. That's what is unfair, and not what it's being done now to restore all this chaos. hey shengli i posted in the forums couple of weeks ago about free players who i found with the help of my coaching secretary... i was asked to pay astronomical sums for these players which i obviously didnt have... but later some guy got these players for free... i even sent u a private msg telling u about the manager who got these players and the players which were transferred... but nothing was done about it..... so i thought well maybe it is allowed... n now am being told this is cheating.... thats stupid.... and when i get a player for free my coaching sec tells me "good management".... is that a bug too now |
20/06/2011 17:43 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
221 msgs.
Substitute
|
Ninocchi said: paus united said: I'm talking about playmoney.. Divide it in an exponential way I like the idea for sure but that raises other questions. What about those players that users choose not to pay to raise their average? Chances are that they'll be auctioned for additional funds. Will they still have the ability to raise their average or will they simply be stuck as is permanently excluding training/age? If they do keep their ability to raise their average, then how many people would pay extra money to only spend more raising the other player. Might be more cost-efficient to buy a player of a higher original average. Also, how long would we keep this ability for? Lots of questions, but again, good basis for fixing it. I like the idea as well. Give managers the opportunity for let's say 1 week to chose whether: 1. they want to increase an effected player till normal avg at a cost (how much can be decided later) 2. they don't want to raise avg and instead keep the player at the -20%avg in their team. So this will be fair because: 1. managers have to pay for good players 2. managers will be compensated fairly for selling/firing players before |
20/06/2011 17:43 |
| Kings XI Punjab - Div1/Gr1 | ||
|
Username
280 msgs.
First-team player
|
SrInerte said: well,after renew some of my player i didn´t know the solution wasn´t so bad actually i think all of us should be happy. I thought our players were turning from 50 to 32 but that was because of the moral and energy...Some people might be not happy as they paid a lot for a player who decrease because of someone who got advantage of the situation but most of us win with this situation i signed sever players 50 av that now is 44 which is not so bad at all, I want to apologise to all @´s i could offense i think the solution is not so bad and not everybody can be happy but that´s the way it is decreasin 4 points or 6 is not so bad besides some players are young and will get better with training so , what´s the big deal ?¿ i didn´t realised that until i renew some contracts and saw the real AV i am very bad at mats D thank´s @ and sorry for allI have already said this on page 1... |
20/06/2011 17:43 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1 msgs.
Ball boy
|
i didn't buy any player during the period in question, but all my team players average were all reduced by 20%. as a result of this i lost my games to my opponent whose players average were not reduced. this is not fair, i got tired of the whole process and i don't just know what to say or do. pls, restore my players average. thank you | 20/06/2011 17:46 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
15
