Chika Fujiwara wrote :
We will still be able to change player names? I really like that free feature.

If the game is trying to make money without making it a pay-to-win, then such features should definitely go under a paid option.

I should better rename all my players piego karadona before the update. If it can't be for free enimoor as in e-n-i-m-o-o-r.

I'm Not sure of wanting to continue, after all, player's name was the Key of my team

well, i will continue, but now i will be the only Who Will Know the real player name

needing to do an excel of The player's name IG and the players name i would Put to Him.

@shika
Shichimiya Shirogane shinomiya suyri sotoka.
Suggest should stay still.

Don-x wrote :
@shika
Shichimiya Shirogane shinomiya suyri sotoka.
Suggest should stay still.

Too Much S...


XD

I will continue anyways, i want to became The best team of all...

On the tactics page, could there be a message saying which tactics are currently loaded?

Bill Beaver wrote :
On the tactics page, could there be a message saying which tactics are currently loaded?

This can be looked at soon. Going right into my notebook

I suggest an option to preset match tactics to competitive matches like we now have for custom matches.
Maybe a 'Plus' option?

Bill Beaver wrote :
On the tactics page, could there be a message saying which tactics are currently loaded?

This can be looked at soon. Going right into my notebook

Great - thanks!

Mikkel Hansen wrote :
I suggest an option to preset match tactics to competitive matches like we now have for custom matches.
Maybe a 'Plus' option?

Already planned to give subscribers an option to set tactics for a certain number of matches (or may be days) in advance.

Teams using defensive lineups and defensive tactics should be rewarded. I just lost to a team who was playing one defender.....

Right now it is encouraged to just lineup 8 offensive players, lets bring some realism into the game please.

Shaun Stephens wrote :
Teams using defensive lineups and defensive tactics should be rewarded. I just lost to a team who was playing one defender.....

Right now it is encouraged to just lineup 8 offensive players, lets bring some realism into the game please.

A total game engine update is coming soon with lot of improvements. A few other updates to be rolled out before that but you can be assured it is not far away.

i hope experience become less important. Because, at this momenti, this game is impossible to play without very old players.......

hope experience become less important. Because, at this momenti, this game is impossible to play without very old players.......

How about older players losing their endurance more quickly, year by year, after age 30? This would be a neat counterbalance (if endurance is important in the match engine). Players would become better as they age, but their performance level would drop off significantly - being outrun by a younger, more energetic, teams.

Just cap the effect of other attributes of a player based on experience instead of the current system of 50% weight. That would solve this to an extent. So a player with 50 in other atts and 90 xp is no longer rated 70 but only 50, but the same player will be rated 30 if he has only 10 xp. Older players start losing atts anyways so their high xp no more matters (other than training xp for youngsters) and they will truly start declining in performance.

Fathima wrote :
Just cap the effect of other attributes of a player based on experience instead of the current system of 50% weight. That would solve this to an extent. So a player with 50 in other atts and 90 xp is no longer rated 70 but only 50, but the same player will be rated 30 if he has only 10 xp. Older players start losing atts anyways so their high xp no more matters (other than training xp for youngsters) and they will truly start declining in performance.

This is a good suggestion Fathima. But we can only make this change in the next update to the match engine. Right now, the match engine uses a player's experience in a different way, and including it in the rating in an accurate way is almost impossible. It totally depends on match situations, in certain situations experience will be worth more than 50% (example - decision making whether to commit a tackle or to just hold ground), but experience might be totally negligible in some other situations. We will have a good re-think about it while we update the match engine, and reflect it in player ratings accordingly.

Having said that, we are never going to remove the effect of the experience attribute. It is the only factor in the game that stops managers from developing 30 future superstars at the same time. But we agree that there is a bias towards highly experienced older players due to the current system. We already managed to cut down that through the update to the teamless transfer market by making such high quality old players less available., and any future updates on the experience attribute will be only to reduce that further, not to remove the importance of experience totally. Your players will still need experience to perform better and also to help other players gain experience. But we will definitely have a good look at letting teams not succeed just by having experience alone.

For the Youth Academy could we add a control/management function. Something along the lines of a way to reduce the randomness as you increase the investment in the academy. There could be a drop down selection that allows the manager to "focus" the academy on a general position (GK, AM, WB etc) with increasing degree of effect as you invest more in the academy.

So if you have lvl 1 academy it's completely random and then the randomness reduces by 5% at every level until the jump from lvl 8 to lvl 9 where it goes to a 10% reduction of randomness. It could look something like this:

Lvl 1= 95% random
Lvl 2= 90% random
Lvl 3= 85% random
Lvl 4= 80% random
Lvl 5= 75% random
Lvl 6= 70% random
Lvl 7= 65% random
Lvl 8= 60% random
Lvl 9= 50% random
Lvl 10= 40% random
Lvl 11= 30% random
Lvl 12= 20% random

This way there is always some degree of randomness to the generation but it rewards the managers who invest in the process.

An alternate way to reduce randomness would be to progressively eliminate non-elected positions from the selection criteria as the academy investment increases. So perhaps at level 2 all but one of the positions factors into the youth generation formula. Then at level 4 all but 2 of the possible positions factor into the youth generation and so on. This way you can potentially maintain the same random calculation but the reduction in positions to select from improves the likelihood that the manager gets a player for the position they are wanting to develop.

Anyway, the youth academy is one of my favourite aspects of the game but would love to see managers have more input in how the academy operates as they would in real life. And any way you go about adding some manager control to the process makes the costs associated with the initial investment into the academy as well as the costs tied to promoting more players in a season more palatable.

Nice ideas on youth academy, Adam.

Give the opportunities for player that will retire couod become coaches after retiring