Jump to content

cadav

Members
  • Posts

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cadav

  1. Re: Russian and Ukraine Player Analysis 2010 Don't get the BEREZUTSKIY drop, I've been keeping an eye on him, plays most games, and a lot for russia. I guess he must have been playing poorly? :-(
  2. Re: Maximum allowed to pay It's simple really, if you have really good players already, your maximum bid is lowered slightly, as the chairman will be less likely to approve unnecessary spending. The other team must need said player more than you, ie, their team is worse, so the chairman allows them to spend more to try and get him. It's actually a clever, and very fair system to prevent player hogging.
  3. Re: sergio busquets (barcelona) Since he won the champions league and world cup, playing almost every game in both campaigns, he should be 92/93 on merit very soon
  4. Re: Player Concerns I'm sure these people have an embarrassment of riches that would make Chelsea blush For example, fighting for the right back position.... Dani Alves + Maicon + Ramos. Not even 2 of those players would end up at the same club. You need to provide concrete examples of the concern system failing, because again, for me, it's not strict enough and has already been dialled down too much.
  5. Re: Player Concerns I don't have any player concerns from youth or otherwise, and I have a fairly large (80-odd) squad. I haven't seen any concerns in my setup from any team with a small pool of players. Sounds like player concerns are doing exactly what they are designed to do, force player-hoggers - yes you with 200 players and a dozen players out on loan - to sell up some talent you don't need. Doesn't matter how you whine on about it, the only problem is the concerns aren't going up fast enough, I want your cast offs sooner than later. I've only seen a few level 4's so far, and no level 5's.
  6. Re: Player Concerns I like player concerns, have been looking forward to picking some players up from teams who hogg way more top players than they need. Problem is, it's not strict enough yet. I haven't seen anyone go over level 2 concern in my setup, and lots of Level 2's have dropped back to level 1. Still waiting.....
  7. Re: Insider's latest rant - May 2010 Player concerns aren't going up fast enough for my liking. Looking at the biggest player hogger in the setup, he has an entire teams worth of concerned players. This is good. It's working, he shouldn't be able to hog all these players. But none of them have gone beyond level 2. Some of them should be beyond 2 and into Level 3 by now.
  8. Re: Lucas Barrios: unknown Argentinian goal-machine What a rise to prominence. Came 3rd in budesiliga top goal scorers, practically played every game, did very well in kicker rankings. Current ranked 16th in the WORLD according to castrolfootball.com and going to the world cup 2010 with Paraguay!
  9. Re: Serie A - Analysis and Ratings Hope that's not all of them, Hamsik and Balotelli haven't got their respective +2's!
  10. Re: ronn's La Liga And Premier League Ratings 09/10 Busquets has played many more times for barca than krkic in the last year or more. He starts the majority of games has started games for the Spanish national side - 8 caps! Not to mention starting in the champions league final last year for the winning team. I think that deserves more like a +2 or +3, 88 is far too low for him. In the same time period Krkic has been used sparingly as a late sub for barca, I don't think he should rise.
  11. Re: Marek Hamsik Should have been made 91 last time around. Has made a great start this year, 92 isn't out of the question, a drop is next to impossible as he consistently outperforms 93 or 94 rated players eg. Seedorf.
  12. Re: GIULIANO, Victor (84) - 9D Started the first game for Brazil in the under 20's world cup. (as number 10) Hit the bar early on and then later in the game scored as brazil dominated.
  13. cadav

    Bojan

    Re: Bojan He barely played last year at all... 89 is pushing it already.
  14. Re: whos ratings will go up deffintly ENOH, Eyong (84) Ajax --> 87/88
  15. Re: Bafetimbi GOMIS Don't think he will go up, didn't too anything last season beyond the level of an 89. Maybe if he has a good season at Lyon he will hit 90.
  16. Re: Squad Sizes So anyway the squad sizes are...BUMP!
  17. Re: Players You Think Should Be Higher Eyong ENOH (84) has played almost every game for Ajax and Cameroon in the last year when fit.
  18. Re: Squad Sizes General (65) Youth (180) Loaned Out (12) Exists in my setup. He owns practically every good prospect in the game.
  19. Re: Squad Sizes I can understand they don't want to upset customers, but they should at least do something...! Player hogging is not skill, it's not scouting, it's checking the forums every day. If anything it just means you are a heavy browser. They are worried about upsetting 1000 pound gorilla control freaks who get kicks from keeping their setups permanently destroyed and unplayable for anyone who joins them? It's bold faced milking of a glitch in the game. Plenty of players in the game do well without doing it, by using tactics, playing fair and value trades. I'm one to talk. Frankly I'm embarrassed by my 80 player team, but I made sure I got some players just so the main hoggers couldn't! I would LOVE to be forced to trim that squad - and I know others who feel the same. I'm begging you soccermanager - tax the hell out of me! People who protest measures to rebalance this have deep seated control issues. Taxing these teams quickly and harshly is the only way to go. (of course it could be combined with limiting loaners (partly done) and closing the riser/wage loophole). 200+ player squads... maybe a billion in player "assets" just floating around consequence free, it's just ABSOLUTELY RIDONKULOUS!
  20. Re: Squad Sizes Soccermanager is great, I never complain about it normally, but this squad size limit thing really has to be sorted out. It's the most massive glaring problem with the game, and we are all blind to it because we are used to it - It's the elephant in the room that we forget about. Just introduce somebody new to soccermanager and dwell on their reaction when you try to explain to them why some teams have over 200 players. There is a painless simple way to sort this - large squad = increased overheads. Or simply this could be thought of as a large squad tax If you have over 50 players your overheads go up 20%, 100 players your overheads go up 50%, ratchet this up the whole way. 200+ player squads should have many times the overheads of a normal club After all, if chelsea were to start training and employing over a hundred players they would need extra training grounds and facilities and infrastructure. It's realistic(ish). Is there even a squad limit in real life? I don't think so, I just think it's only feasible to train and manage and keep so many players happy. This would sort out the squad size problem and take a realistic bite out of the vast sums of money these people have gathered from player hogging. I would make these changes swiftly and suddenly - so that the biggest offenders take a hammering for weeks/months as they rapidly try to offload their excess. It would also mean that the teams with massive amounts of players wouldn't become quite so rich as they offload these players as necessary. This would keep the economy of the game ticking along normally, as it's not wealth redistribution, it's simple a trickle of wealth removal forcing players hands. Players would be made available, the transfer market would breathe and function again, I literally cannot see a downside - except for if the financial penalties are too lenient, and we end up with certain times having a billion in the bank due the the players they were "encouraged" to get rid of. The penalties must be immediate and very harsh. A friend of mine has taken over a team recently that was picked clean by vultures during an unmanaged stint. He has £150million to spend but can't spend it! No one sells, everyone turtles on their amassed wealth, fearful to lose any prospect and eager to deny other teams talent. He isn't the worst off, division 3 and 4 are almost entirely 21-player-unmanaged-trash.
  21. Re: Did the SM measure to erase surplus money work? My solution would be quite simple. Really what we need is a tax on the super rich, or should I say, a tax on the "super-squad-value". Squad caps not needed if you are leaking money by trying to maintain an unrealistically large squad. Yes, player AI will force people to sell, but this will make them massively rich - give me 10 top players instead of 200million in cash any day of the week. It's the hoggers who are the massively rich ones (squad value), and some of them will have BILLIONs after player AI forces them to sell their hordes of talent. We need a bit of social equalising.... big investments to crappy clubs with crappy teams, and some months of massively taxing of the big guys with enormous squads. I don't mind if a team has 18 great players and some top youths who do well in the league, they are entitled to what they have, it means they are like Chelsea. I just hate the very unrealistic team with 32 GREAT players and 100 top youth players. Honestly, if chelsea were training and bringing up over 100 squad players ..... (apart from the fact that it would be impossible and would never happen ) Can you imagine the extra COSTS? You would basically be paying for quadruple the training facilities, grouds, staff, everything! People have been hogging 100/200+ players for YEARS now and not payed anything but their wages (mostly youth player wages). We need to start back taxing them. My proposal is... if you have more than 50 players your expenditure on maintenance etc should start going massively up... right up to ASTRONOMICAL levels for having 150 players and more. This isn't hyperbole...the fees involved should be this high because it's just not realistic to train and look after that many players. Also... back taxes!!!! You've hogged them for years.... it's just depressing when a good young player gets added and I recommend my friend in a lower league to snap him up but the nerd in the top division sneaks in and makes him his 204th player! Well i'm sorry but that 204th player wont fit in your 6th training facilities, they are already fit to burst, time to build a 7th at a cost of 200 million to facilitate this..... you see where I'm going here?
  22. Re: Did the SM measure to erase surplus money work? Can't wait for the player AI. I was going to suggest a simply taxing the hell out of stupidly big squads, but this sounds like it might do the job.
×
×
  • Create New...